public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Jonathan S. Katz <[email protected]>
To: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
Cc: Simon Riggs <[email protected]>
Cc: Dave Page <[email protected]>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL www <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Updating Sourceforge
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:36:35 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABUevEzJJymOU2WvFKRpK21R+qbDiun5+y47=L11UCjSHcOLdg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CABUevEztmKt-PO66h-x4s+bdav4POJfxDPj6i7pTQ1OpmgUGig@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+OCxox=xRPcmOXfTOLAge1WN=ysYcYaGj9woXETL1zutac5xQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+U5nM+H0qLrjgRbvXQJ3MA1ErodHQOgoMsbyqPnb6e9UXByBg@mail.gmail.com>
<CABUevEzJJymOU2WvFKRpK21R+qbDiun5+y47=L11UCjSHcOLdg@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-www>
On Apr 11, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Simon Riggs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 11 April 2013 19:50, Dave Page <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> We again don't have anyone updating Sourceforge:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/pgsql/
>>>>>
>>>>> The posted version is 9.0. I again suggest we remove it.
>>>>
>>>> And I again second this suggestion.
>>>
>>> Thirded.
>>
>>
>> -1
>>
>> This is a form of advocacy for the project, just like listing anywhere else.
>
> Is it really? Does anybody care about sourceforge these days?
>
> And is it good advocacy if people go there and download old versions?
>
>> Putting correct and useful information out there is what we should be trying
>> to do more of, not less.
>>
>> I completely agree that you guys shouldn't do it, but that doesn't mean
>> nobody does it at all.
>
>
> We are clearly not capable of keeping the sourceforge records up to date.
>
> We've had multiple different people in charge of it, and it has
> *never* been updated on time more than once after a new person picks
> it up. In this case, it's clearly lacking by *years*.
>
> We do have the same issue at freshmeat, but at least there is no
> *code* uploaded there.
>
>
>> I'll arrange it, if you don't object.
>
> While I don't trust you any less than the previous people who have
> volunteered to maintain this and then failed one or two releases
> later, I personally think we've reached the point where we should just
> accept that we can't do it, and get rid of it. We can keep switching
> maintainers, but in the end, I don't think it's worth it.
>
> That's IMO, of course, others may vary.
While I do agree with Simon in that it is an avenue for increased visibility of the PG project, the track record of keeping the info up-to-date is poor - even looking at the older versions of files listed, the releases were not kept up to date.
With that said, if Sourceforge has some sort of API that we could plug into and just write a request to upload new releases for PG to, it may be worthwhile. But if we cannot automate it, I don't think it's worthwhile.
Jonathan
--
Sent via pgsql-www mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www
view thread (19+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Updating Sourceforge
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox