On 8/28/18 3:15 PM, Justin Clift wrote:
> On 2018-08-28 20:06, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 08:01:12PM +0100, Justin Clift wrote:
>>> On 2018-08-28 18:32, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> >Well, if we have another installer provider who has similar or better
>>> >performance for things we care about, e.g. reliable updates, support,
>>> >_and_ is willing to host the binaries where we want them, we can
>>> switch
>>> >to them. While it is kind of disloyal to change preferred
>>> providers, we
>>> >also didn't agree to have them be preferred forever, especially if
>>> >someone better shows up. Of course, switching might be disruptive for
>>> >our installers uses, so we have to consider that too.
>>>
>>> An alternative approach would be for us ("the project") to build
>>> official
>>> installers ourselves, with those being the recommended ones.
>>
>> Uh, we used to do that but found the user support overhead too much.
>
> No worries, was just a thought. :)
Well, a few things has changed since the decision was made, such as
tools, resources, and in some cases, people, so we do have a good
opportunity to reevaluate and see what makes sense. The success of the
yum + apt repositories also provides a template for how to manage &
support the installers.
I do understand it is a bit more involved (i.e. there are interface
components with a lot of these) but perhaps we can do what the other
packages do and install the minimum for supporting a PostgreSQL environment.
Jonathan