Re: pg_migrator issue with contrib

Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
> > On 6/7/09 10:56 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> OK, that's more or less what I thought, and what I intended to convey
> >> upthread.  As far as core Postgres is concerned this is a new feature,
> >> and we haven't worked out all the kinks yet.
> > 
> > Yes, I'm calling it "pg_migrator beta" in any advocacy/PR about it. 
> > AFAIC, until we have these sorts of issues worked out, it's still a beta.
> 
> afaiks bruce stated he is going to remove the BETA tag from pg_migrator 
> soon so I guess calling it beta in the main project docs will confuse 
> the hell out of people(or causing them to think that it is not beta any 
> more).
> So maybe calling it experimental(from the POV of the main project) or 
> something similar might still be the better solution.

This all sounds very discouraging.  It is like, "Oh, my, there is a
migration tool and it might have bugs.  How do we prevent people from
using it?"

Right now nothing in the project is referring to pg_migrator except in
the press release, and it is marked as beta there.  How do you want to
deemphasize it more than that?  Why did I bother working on this if the
community reaction is to try to figure out how to make people avoid
using it?

I am now thinking I need to my own PR for pg_migrator because obviously
the community is only worried it might have a bug.  Instead of testing
it, looking at the code, submitting bug reports, or anything
constructive, you sit around figuring out how to put a disparaging label
on it!

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +