On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 01:20:20PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> No :). I liken it to the idea that it is a chore with little perceived
> benefit and thus you have remind your son 6 times within 10 minutes to
> actually take out the garbage.
Ah, but taking out the garbage is something that, while nobody likes to do
it, everyone acknowledges is important.
> The consideration of worth on this topic is based solely on the idea
> that nobody want to do it and not based on any concrete evidence that
> it wouldn't be helpful in the advocacy of our project.
I think you have the burden of proof the wrong way 'round: there's no
evidence that continued listing on SF is worth the bother, expecially in the
absence of long lines of people standing around asking us whether we have
something for them to do.
> There is no denying that SourceForge is a huge repository of Free
> Software nor is there any denying that it is the largest and likely the
> most searched.
I will not deny that it is large, nor that it is likely the largest. I do,
however, deny, that it is "the most searched", if that is to be relevant to
us. I contend that Google is rather more searched. Even Freshmeat seems
more likely to me. I, for example, cannot remember the last time I searched
anything in SF. To begin with, their search is awful, so I get all sorts
of crap I don't want. Google is easier and it gives better results. And
PostgreSQL turns up just fine there.
More important, I think, is that there is no automatic way to update the SF
site that's been proposed. Which means that keeping it up to date will
either (1) suck some human's time to do things manually, or not happen
perfectly, or (most likely) both. People getting possibly buggy software
from a distribution point we treat as a second-class one is surely not the
best way for us to introduce them to Postgres, I'd say.
A