Re: Linux Downloads page change
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Linux Downloads page change |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CABUevEwoXEvi6AqsF6+1RoOpT6BjPcAE=pKQ9TGLX0wrCV3X-A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Linux Downloads page change (Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Linux Downloads page change
|
Список | pgsql-www |
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >>>>> That aside though, the code must be 100% open source to be listed on >>>>> those download pages; Scottie, where can people find the spec files, >>>>> BitRock XML files or whatever? >>>> >>>> While I agree with that requirement in general, we should apply it >>>> fairly. AFAICT the latest release of the EDB installers that had >>>> sourcecode with it was 9.0.2 - I have a hard time seeing that nothing >>>> would've changed since... None of the changes that have been discussed >>>> on the lists here in the past couple of months are anywhere to be >>>> seen.. So should we remove the EDB installers from the page as well? >>> >>> The EDB installers are open source, and have been since they were >>> first published. You can get the code for all branches from >>> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=edb-installers.git;a=summary, and >>> that includes not just the installer files, but the entire build >>> framework. The most recent commit is to the 9.2 branch, from Friday. >> >> Attached is a screenshot showing what this page looked like when I >> sent that email. So someone pushed all those changes *after* I sent >> that email, in what looks like an attempt to dispute that statement. >> While we don't have log extracts showing the exact times (should >> probably fix that in the pggit code), there is certainly a push shown >> around 9AM UTC this morning... (and it shows that between this push >> and the previous *of any activity at all* on that repository, there >> have been another 5189 operations on git.postgresql.org - around 3500 >> pushes, though that includes pushes from the mirror of the main >> postgresql git repo, so it's a little bit inflated. but it pretty >> clearly matches up to the "no activity in 18 months" that the web >> interface showed) > > It gets pushed periodically when I remember to do it (or someone > reminds me), which I guess you've forgotten given that we've had this > exact same discussion before. Yes, I pushed it when you reminded me a > moment ago - and this time remembered to also push the 9.2 branch > which previously hadn't been pushed because it needs to be done > explicitly the first time which I had forgotten to do in the past. > That's where the vast majority of activity has been over recent > months, except the last 3 weeks or so where there have been numerous > bug fixes in the back branches as we've been updating the add-ons that > are available through StackBuilder. We have had the discussion before, and I was pretty sure it ended up in "yes, it should be fixed". But it doesn't change the fact that the repository claimed there had been no changes for *7 months*, certainly not 3 days. Which also agrees very well with the logs on git.postgresql.org. So clearly there is something that doesn't work in this process. >> I know they're *intended* to be opensource. But the normal status is >> they're lagging behind a year or more, so I'm not sure I consider it >> open... My experience shows that whenever I'm looking for something, >> it's not up to date, and it's only pushed when I point it out. It may >> well be that it's pushed at other times as wel of course - but you >> can't really claim it's pushed regularly. > > No, I never have claimed it's pushed regularly. I've always said it's > pushed when I remember or when someone reminds me. The point is that In that case, can we get it done regularly, so it can actually be considered open? > it is pushed, and has been on more than one occasion since 9.0.2 was > released - which should be obvious if you look towards the bottom of > your screenshot. Yeah. I guess you're just not bothering to tag releases anymore? that confused me on that point. >> And frankly, I'm a little offended by whomever made that push into the >> repository to dispute my statement, without claiming responsibility >> for doing so. To me, it's rather obvious it was done as a direct >> response to my email. Given the perfect timing. Whoever did it. > > It was. You reminded me. As you've done in the past. I made no claim > that I push that repo on any regular schedule - merely that I try to > remember to keep it up to date, and the code is available under an > open source licence. Well, IMNSHO, just being available under an open source license *if asked for*, should be well below where a reasonable bar would be put for this. But in treating people the same - I just asked Scottie to make sure that they're not available just when asked for, but all the time. Can you do the same? -- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: