Re: Linux Downloads page change

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Scott Mead <scottm@openscg.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 03:39:54PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Scott Mead <scottm@openscg.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >   1) A no-gui option
>> > >     The bitrock installers do have this, but at times, the technology
>> > > isn't
>> > > perfect.  Many times, people want to just run a command and have it
>> > > install.
>> > > The idea with an RPM of these binaries is that we get the benefit of
>> > > the
>> > > same binaries across installers, AND lower the barrier to entry by
>> > > making
>> > > rpm -ivh ... just work.
>> >
>> > No technology is perfect, but we have numerous users utilising text,
>> > silent and response file installations quite successfully, including
>> > all the additional post-copy steps the installers undertake. We also
>> > have an unpack mode which is much more like an RPM install in that it
>> > just lays down the binaries. Simply put, you can just run a command
>> > and have it install.
>>
>> Agreed.  If the non-GUI mode of the Bitrock installers is broken, please
>> report it and let's fix it.  If it can't be fixed, maybe we need to use
>> another installer, but it is not clear what is broken.  Are you saying
>> it is better for non-GUI installs because they don't need to supply a
>> flag for non-GUI mode?  Shouldn't we just document the flag better?
>
>
> Sorry I'm not being clear here (I've switched timezones just yesterday ).
> I'm not saying that it's broken, just that, from a 'barriers' perspective,
> many customers end up building their own server-only RPM.  They need
> something that is consistent across the many disparate linux distro's (and
> even just versions of the same distro) that they are running.
>
> Some people do it to distribute through their own repository, some just
> don't want to stay beholden to the linux distro's themselves.  Others just
> need a consistent directory structure across distributions so that their
> teams have one less thing to worry about.  The community yum repository and
> binaries are a great thing, and in shops where linux the distributions are
> consistent and version-ing is well managed, I would recommend them every
> time.  The generic RPM option let's us fill a gap between the two; when it
> comes to Small-Mid enterprise, it's very hard to stay consistent across all
> distributions all the time while still making budget and timelines.  The
> generic RPM/DEB allows for that middle-ground and lowers barriers in
> mid-sized enterprises that haven't completely gotten their head around all
> the different aspects of internal distribution.
>
>>
>>
>> The smaller download does make sense --- it is a leaner install.
>>
>> I wonder if the OpenSCG text should more clearly state is doesn't
>> include any GUI componients.
>
>
> Patch attached.

I noticed two quick things: according to the page, you provide RPMs
for RedHat and SuSE (per the logos - I assume Fedora is included in
the RedHat part), and DEBs for Ubuntu.

Why do the patches suggest adding it to Debian (not listed) and to "other"?

I also for the first time clicked one of those links. To me, the way
that those pages request a login and registratoin to download them is
completely unacceptable. Yes, I realize there is a "there's a download
link at the bottom if you don't want to" (or as you like to phrase it,
"feel anti-social", which is clearly designed to make people sign up).
But I don't think that's acceptable for something to be listed on our
primary download pages. I'm ok (but not with a big margin) with how
EnterpriseDB does it - which is that they deliver your download and
*then* suggest you register as well. (Actually, I see now that they
have stopped doing that completely and instead throw some marketing
and ads for their cloud product at you)

I'd like to see that fixed for the developer bundles as well. 

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/