> On 7 Sep 2021, at 17:07, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
>
> On 9/7/21 10:57 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 3:26 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se
>> <mailto:daniel@yesql.se>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7 Sep 2021, at 16:10, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org
>> <mailto:jkatz@postgresql.org>> wrote:
>
>>> I'd be more open to this if the packages themselves were hosted on
>>> community infrastructure and were consistent with the rest of the
>>> packaging projects.
>>
>> That seems a high bar to cross given that we don’t host macOS,
>> Windows and the
>> BSD’s today but link to those.
>>
>> I agree.
>
> It doesn't mean we need to continue to exacerbate the situation by
> linking to downloads that we have little control over.
>
> For example, what happens when the external downloads are unavailable?
> We had a recent incident where this exact scenario happened. There are
> now some reporting mechanisms in place to handle that scenario, but
> ultimately it comes back to "PostgreSQL is unavailable for download."
That is an argument against any outbound links though. Not having the
information in the first place doesn’t seem to make PostgreSQL more available
than the risk of an intermittent 404.
I don’t have strong feelings wrt AIX, nor insights into the current proposal,
but limiting the offering based on what has been effectively grandfathered in
based on fears about future shortcomings in network availability doesn’t seem
to improve user friendliness. Having the packages on offer in the first place,
as discussed downthread, is another matter though and a very real one.
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/