Hi,
On 2014-06-20 15:22:00 +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> well I'm skeptic on the general idea of doing short lived lists and I
> dont think pgadmin is a good example because it is an entirely seperate
> project.
> The only references we have that seems close enough to the "long term
> project will take years to integrate" thing that bdr-users seems to be
> wanted for is more like pgsql-hackers-pitr (seems like thise one was a
> failure in terms of uptake/use), pgsql-ports (long running eventually
> folded into -hackers) and hackers-win32(fairly active at times).
I don't think bdr-users can well be compared with those development
lists - BDR as is is something that can actually be used by users. It's
much more like psycopg (and yes, pgadmin) or such lists.
> However all of those were -hacker related lists not user related ones
> and I think having bdr-users will confuse people over time ("should I
> ask something there or on -general?" or "where to report a bug?") as
> features get moved/folded into main postgresql or changed and people are
> not sure whether they use a patch-set or the version in upstream.
I don't think the core feature will end up being named BDR - for pretty
much that reason...
It might also be important to know that 90% of the code in bdr isn't
patching postgres, but just extension code using existing
facilities. That part isn't gone super fast just because the patches
have been merged. At some point BDR won't be better than what's in core,
and then users will stop using it.
> Could we see what the proposed "description" of that list would be(as in
> second column of: http://www.postgresql.org/list/)?
I'd list it among the 'Project Lists'. Something like 'User oriented
list for the BDR replication project. Both bug reports and questions
about BDR are appriate.'.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services