Re: Linux Downloads page change
| От | Scott Mead |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Linux Downloads page change |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKq0gvKSgqta2Zrtp5OsT5pqO0ZTuAqR=SX1RB4bONcdp9C1AQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Linux Downloads page change (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Linux Downloads page change
|
| Список | pgsql-www |
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
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.
Patch attached.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 03:39:54PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:Agreed. If the non-GUI mode of the Bitrock installers is broken, please
> 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.
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.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
Вложения
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: