Re: status/timeline of pglogical?

On 05/11/2016 09:15 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 05/11/2016 07:30 AM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>> On 05/11/2016 07:25 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Agreed, if for no other reason that including them makes the project
>> responsible for them.
>
> Not on any planet in reality is this true.

On the planet that is user space this is true to varying degrees. Even
as it stands now, no third party packages mentioned in official
releases, folks hit the list thinking some or all are part of the core
Postgres release. This leads to repeated explanations of where the
source really resides for said packages and where to file issues. That
is part of the chore of participating on the lists, but including third
party packages in official releases will just increase that work load
and increase the frustration level of users who have to be reeducated. I
believe in growing the community, however I think there should be a
clear distinction between what is the core release and what is
contributed from outside sources, namely by keeping the announcements
separate. This seems to work for other projects I use/follow; Django,
Pandas, IPython, Sqlite to name a few. Release announcements stick to
the code the project generates and it up to third parties to update
their own announcements. From what I have seen that has not negatively
impacted the growth of the affiliated communities.

>
> JD
>
>
>

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com