On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Lenz Grimmer <lenz@grimmer.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@gunduz.org> wrote:
> FWIW, I *test* the packages on SL, CentOS and RHEL before pushing them > to the public repository.
Is there an automated test suite that you perform and is it available from somewhere? I'd be glad to give it a whirl on OL.
> I don't have OL handy. If there is a bug, then we will need to be responsible for any issues > that may arise.
Sure, I understand. FWIW, the ISOs can be freely downloaded from various places. The system is pre-configured to obtain updates from Oracle's public yum repository.
> On the other hand, I am not that willing to add Oracle word to our website.
I see. Well, if that's the key concern behind this whole discussion, just tell me so right away - there is no point in trying to resolve technical issues, if it's actually about politics.
I don't believe it is. I see no problem in adding information about the Oracle linux distribution, just like we have information about Oracle Solaris. This is about providing a service to our users, after all.
Now if Devrim doesn't want to spend time verifying the packages for Oracle Linux, that's of course his decision. But we can certainly list what the distribution default is. But we could then specifically list under the section of "PostgreSQL Yum Repository" which distributions are supported there.
(Though in the end I think it would be beneficial to the users if we could support Oracle Linux as well, its always a matter of resources vs number of users. There are a lot of debian based distributions that aren't officially supported by our apt repository either, for example)
In fact, we should probably list that there regardless - so people know which versions are actually supported by that repository. Should we perhaps even specifically list which versions of each distro?