Thread
-
pgfoundry references in docs
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> — 2012-07-03T19:20:35Z
Attached are two patches, one of which I'd like to apply. Open for discussion on which one. The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for this being that pgfoundry doesn't *accept* new projects anymore. The second one removes the reference to pgfoundry completely. As a step in the deprecation. I'd prefer to apply the second one, but will settle for the first one if people object ;) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
-
Re: pgfoundry references in docs
David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com> — 2012-07-03T20:01:02Z
On Jul 3, 2012, at 9:20 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for > new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for this being that pgfoundry > doesn't *accept* new projects anymore. Should you not perhaps recommend that they go somewhere else? David
-
Re: pgfoundry references in docs
Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> — 2012-07-03T20:14:12Z
On 3 July 2012 20:20, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > The second one removes the reference to pgfoundry completely. As a > step in the deprecation. > > I'd prefer to apply the second one, but will settle for the first one > if people object ;) I'd also prefer if you applied the second one. -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
-
Re: pgfoundry references in docs
Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> — 2012-07-03T20:32:59Z
On Tuesday, July 3, 2012, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On 3 July 2012 20:20, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > The second one removes the reference to pgfoundry completely. As a > > step in the deprecation. > > > > I'd prefer to apply the second one, but will settle for the first one > > if people object ;) > > I'd also prefer if you applied the second one. > +1 -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
-
Re: pgfoundry references in docs
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> — 2012-07-04T07:13:29Z
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > > > On Tuesday, July 3, 2012, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> >> On 3 July 2012 20:20, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >> > The second one removes the reference to pgfoundry completely. As a >> > step in the deprecation. >> > >> > I'd prefer to apply the second one, but will settle for the first one >> > if people object ;) >> >> I'd also prefer if you applied the second one. > > > +1 Since all those who commented preferred that option, I've applied that patch. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
-
Re: pgfoundry references in docs
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> — 2012-07-04T07:15:33Z
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:01 PM, David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com> wrote: > On Jul 3, 2012, at 9:20 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for >> new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for this being that pgfoundry >> doesn't *accept* new projects anymore. > > Should you not perhaps recommend that they go somewhere else? Not really. We have nowhere else to recommend, since we don't run a replacement for it. And we really don't want to get involved in listing all the different third party sites out there. (For example, we had a reference to sourceforge.net in the same paragraph. And while that was certainly "state of the art" when the docs were written, I don't think anybody sane would recommend that today. The reality keeps changing on those things, so it really doesn't belong in the docs). We could put a set of links on the wiki if we want something "more live". -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
-
Re: pgfoundry references in docs
Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at> — 2012-07-04T07:18:21Z
Magnus Hagander wrote: > Attached are two patches, one of which I'd like to apply. Open for > discussion on which one. > > The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for > new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for this being that pgfoundry > doesn't *accept* new projects anymore. > > The second one removes the reference to pgfoundry completely. As a > step in the deprecation. > > I'd prefer to apply the second one, but will settle for the first one > if people object ;) Well, I don't object to the documentation change, but I have a problem with the fact. Are there any other places that could be recommended for hosting my pgFoundry projects? If yes, that should be mentioned in the documentation. Yours, Laurenz Albe
-
Re: pgfoundry references in docs
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> — 2012-07-04T07:20:00Z
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at> wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: >> Attached are two patches, one of which I'd like to apply. Open for >> discussion on which one. >> >> The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for >> new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for this being that pgfoundry >> doesn't *accept* new projects anymore. >> >> The second one removes the reference to pgfoundry completely. As a >> step in the deprecation. >> >> I'd prefer to apply the second one, but will settle for the first one >> if people object ;) > > Well, I don't object to the documentation change, but I have a problem > with the fact. > > Are there any other places that could be recommended for hosting > my pgFoundry projects? > If yes, that should be mentioned in the documentation. Exiting pgfoundry projects are perfectly safe for now - but *new* projects are not accepted. There is a project underway (for a *long* time - it keeps getting stalled) working on migration paths. Until such paths are available and documented, existing projects will still be safe on pgfoundry. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
-
Re: pgfoundry references in docs
David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com> — 2012-07-04T14:21:28Z
On Jul 4, 2012, at 9:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Not really. We have nowhere else to recommend, since we don't run a > replacement for it. And we really don't want to get involved in > listing all the different third party sites out there. (For example, > we had a reference to sourceforge.net in the same paragraph. And while > that was certainly "state of the art" when the docs were written, I > don't think anybody sane would recommend that today. The reality keeps > changing on those things, so it really doesn't belong in the docs). We > could put a set of links on the wiki if we want something "more live". Ah, then perhaps a link to such a wiki page would suffice. I think that would be a good compromise. David
-
Re: pgfoundry references in docs
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> — 2012-07-04T15:17:52Z
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 4:21 PM, David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com> wrote: > On Jul 4, 2012, at 9:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> Not really. We have nowhere else to recommend, since we don't run a >> replacement for it. And we really don't want to get involved in >> listing all the different third party sites out there. (For example, >> we had a reference to sourceforge.net in the same paragraph. And while >> that was certainly "state of the art" when the docs were written, I >> don't think anybody sane would recommend that today. The reality keeps >> changing on those things, so it really doesn't belong in the docs). We >> could put a set of links on the wiki if we want something "more live". > > Ah, then perhaps a link to such a wiki page would suffice. I think that would be a good compromise. That can really be said for all of Appendix H in that case... -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/