Re: Unsupported 3rd-party solutions (Was: Few questions

Marc G. Fournier wrote:

>> 1. your project must be pgxs compatible.
>> 2. it must be hosted on pgFoundry.
>> 3. it must have automatic regression testing built in (perhaps this
>> is part of #1).
>> 4. documentation must follow some guidelines so that it is easy to
>> combine it with other docs.
>> 5. someone must suggest it as a candidate for inclusion and give a
>> good motivation.
>
>
> Now, inclusion into where?  The list?

The idea is that my suggested project, (I henceforth refer to it as
"this project") should maintain some number of packaged configurations.
So what I mean is inclusion of the candidate project artifacts in some
(or all) of those packages.

>> 6. there's a voting period and a minimum number of votes.
>
>
> This one, I would say, will be very difficult ... what if its a one of
> piece of software, that 2 ppl are using, but its very good at what it
> does?  Or a one of piece of software, that sucks royally but is the
> only thing available, and 100 ppl are using?

You're right. This is not crystal clear. How about this:

For the first category, an inclusion could be possible if the software
has a potential to reach more users and can make the offering more
complete in some respect. If that's not the case, it should be included.

Most software that "sucks royally" will be filtered out in the first 4
steps. If it is not, and if a lot of people vote to get it in, well then
it does not suck so bad after all, at least not according to the voters.
So it's in provided nothing better exists already. It can still be
replaced of course, should something better come along.

>> 7. if the votes are in your favor, your project will be part of the
>> supported configurations and you will be asked to participate in the
>> integration work.
>
>
> Integration work ... where?

In two places. Most of it takes place in the candidate project but
documentation overviews, composite configurations etc. must be updated
in this project to include the artifacts from the new project. Such
global changes can be made by the contributor in the form of patches.

>> This project might be perceived as a thirdparty add-on and thus, fail
>> its purpose. The steering committee must stand behind this
>> officially. Will you? What's your opinion about the suggestion?
>
>
> Behind what?  A list on pgFoundry of recommended software?  Sure ...
> integrating that list into the physical postgresql.tar.gz file that is
> the core server distribution?  No ...

The core server distribution is left untouched by all this.

It would be really nice if this project could publish packages using
your BitTorrent and ftp mirrors though.

Regards,

Thomas Hallgren