Обсуждение: Include PostgresNIO Swift client in the Documentation
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/external-interfaces.html Description: Hi, I'm reaching out to ask if the Swift Postgres could be included in the listing here: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/external-interfaces.html Name: PostgresNIO Language: Swift Comments: Non-blocking, event-driven client built with SwiftNIO Website: https://github.com/vapor/postgres-nio Thanks for your time and consideration, Fabian Fett
Hi Fabian, On 8/10/23 3:55 AM, PG Doc comments form wrote: > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: > > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/external-interfaces.html > Description: > > Hi, > > I'm reaching out to ask if the Swift Postgres could be included in the > listing here: > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/external-interfaces.html > > Name: PostgresNIO > Language: Swift > Comments: Non-blocking, event-driven client built with SwiftNIO > Website: https://github.com/vapor/postgres-nio As of late, we've been keeping the canonical list on the wiki page here, which already includes PostgresNIO: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/List_of_drivers The last time this came up, I think we discussed linking to the wiki page from the docs, vs. trying to keep the docs up-to-date with all of the drivers available. Perhaps it's worth seeing if we want to make any changes to the docs page prior to the v16 GA? Thanks, Jonathan
Вложения
> On 11 Aug 2023, at 02:23, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
> The last time this came up, I think we discussed linking to the wiki page from the docs, vs. trying to keep the docs
up-to-datewith all of the drivers available. Perhaps it's worth seeing if we want to make any changes to the docs page
priorto the v16 GA?
The docs page does mention that the list is likely to be incomplete, with the
following sentence, but there is no mention of the Wiki page at all:
"Table H.1 includes a list of some of these projects."
That being said, a lot of readers will likely skim over and immediately look at
the table, missing the small disclaimer. I wonder if we aren't serving our
users better by removing the table and only referring to the Wiki page? Having
two lists will prompt the discussion of what to include where over and over
again, which isn't helping anyone.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
On 8/21/23 7:58 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> On 11 Aug 2023, at 02:23, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: > >> The last time this came up, I think we discussed linking to the wiki page from the docs, vs. trying to keep the docs up-to-datewith all of the drivers available. Perhaps it's worth seeing if we want to make any changes to the docs page priorto the v16 GA? > > The docs page does mention that the list is likely to be incomplete, with the > following sentence, but there is no mention of the Wiki page at all: > > "Table H.1 includes a list of some of these projects." > > That being said, a lot of readers will likely skim over and immediately look at > the table, missing the small disclaimer. I wonder if we aren't serving our > users better by removing the table and only referring to the Wiki page? Having > two lists will prompt the discussion of what to include where over and over > again, which isn't helping anyone. This is what I was saying. I was waiting on attempting a patch to see if there was consensus. There's now a couple of threads now with similar suggestions, I'll work on getting patches ready. Thanks, Jonathan
Вложения
On 8/21/23 10:55 AM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > On 8/21/23 7:58 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >>> On 11 Aug 2023, at 02:23, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >> >>> The last time this came up, I think we discussed linking to the wiki >>> page from the docs, vs. trying to keep the docs up-to-date with all >>> of the drivers available. Perhaps it's worth seeing if we want to >>> make any changes to the docs page prior to the v16 GA? >> >> The docs page does mention that the list is likely to be incomplete, >> with the >> following sentence, but there is no mention of the Wiki page at all: >> >> "Table H.1 includes a list of some of these projects." >> >> That being said, a lot of readers will likely skim over and >> immediately look at >> the table, missing the small disclaimer. I wonder if we aren't >> serving our >> users better by removing the table and only referring to the Wiki >> page? Having >> two lists will prompt the discussion of what to include where over and >> over >> again, which isn't helping anyone. > > This is what I was saying. I was waiting on attempting a patch to see if > there was consensus. There's now a couple of threads now with similar > suggestions, I'll work on getting patches ready. Suggested patch attached. Notes: 1. Replaced language to reference the wiki page 2. Replaced table with the URL 3. Changed the "licenses" comment to be more affirmative, i.e., there are language interfaces that are released under licenses different than the PostgreSQL Licence. Jonathan
Вложения
> On 22 Aug 2023, at 05:23, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: > > On 8/21/23 10:55 AM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: >> On 8/21/23 7:58 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >>>> On 11 Aug 2023, at 02:23, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >>> >>>> The last time this came up, I think we discussed linking to the wiki page from the docs, vs. trying to keep the docsup-to-date with all of the drivers available. Perhaps it's worth seeing if we want to make any changes to the docs pageprior to the v16 GA? >>> >>> The docs page does mention that the list is likely to be incomplete, with the >>> following sentence, but there is no mention of the Wiki page at all: >>> >>> "Table H.1 includes a list of some of these projects." >>> >>> That being said, a lot of readers will likely skim over and immediately look at >>> the table, missing the small disclaimer. I wonder if we aren't serving our >>> users better by removing the table and only referring to the Wiki page? Having >>> two lists will prompt the discussion of what to include where over and over >>> again, which isn't helping anyone. >> This is what I was saying. I was waiting on attempting a patch to see if there was consensus. There's now a couple ofthreads now with similar suggestions, I'll work on getting patches ready. > > Suggested patch attached. Notes: > > 1. Replaced language to reference the wiki page > 2. Replaced table with the URL > 3. Changed the "licenses" comment to be more affirmative, i.e., there are language interfaces that are released under licensesdifferent than the PostgreSQL Licence. This is in line with what I imagined as well, so unless anyone thinks otherwise I will apply this and backpatch it to all branches. -- Daniel Gustafsson
On 8/22/23 3:10 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > This is in line with what I imagined as well, so unless anyone thinks otherwise > I will apply this and backpatch it to all branches. I could argue it both ways on whether or not to backpatch. However, given the list of drivers should work with all supported PG releases, and it expands on the current known list, I'd +1 backpatching. Jonathan
Вложения
> On 22 Aug 2023, at 16:25, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: > > On 8/22/23 3:10 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > >> This is in line with what I imagined as well, so unless anyone thinks otherwise >> I will apply this and backpatch it to all branches. > > I could argue it both ways on whether or not to backpatch. However, given the list of drivers should work with all supportedPG releases, and it expands on the current known list, I'd +1 backpatching. I opted for backpatching as the table is equally incomplete for all branches, and the wiki equally applicable. -- Daniel Gustafsson
On 8/23/23 8:41 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> On 22 Aug 2023, at 16:25, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote: >> >> On 8/22/23 3:10 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> >>> This is in line with what I imagined as well, so unless anyone thinks otherwise >>> I will apply this and backpatch it to all branches. >> >> I could argue it both ways on whether or not to backpatch. However, given the list of drivers should work with all supportedPG releases, and it expands on the current known list, I'd +1 backpatching. > > I opted for backpatching as the table is equally incomplete for all branches, > and the wiki equally applicable. Agreed; thanks! Jonathan