Re: Download links

On Saturday 30 August 2008 15:59:41 Dave Page wrote:
> The ordering intentionally puts the easy to use, one size fits all
> above the platform specific packaging. Experience tells us that the
> people that have most trouble figuring out what to download tend to be
> the ones for whom the one-click point and drool packages are the most
> appropriate. The more experienced users are generally able to find the
> 'exact-fit' packages for their distro.

What is concerning me is that the one-click installer is essentially a 
proprietary product and it is put into the prominent spot PostgreSQL -> 
Download -> Linux -> first choice.  Now, basically everyone who wants free 
advertisement has to make their own one-click installer and fight with you 
for that spot.  At the very least, the whole thing should be moved to a 
community-hosted infrastructure, an open development model, and no company 
advertisement.

(For related reasons, I think the company names on the download pages should 
be deleted altogether.)

Also, I would personally never recommend anyone using a non-distro packaged 
binary, which is why I am concerned that we are putting this into the 
prominent spot.  There are good technical reasons for that recommendation.  
For example, if you install a nonpackaged version of libpq, none of the other 
packages available in your distro that depend on libpq will work.  The 
explanation you give above is acknowledged but I don't believe it is 
accurate.  The distro packaging should be the default even for the 
non-superguru user.