> Taking into account that quite a few people have repeatedly stated that
the components in contrib are considered more supported/recommended than
similar solutions found on gborg or any other external site, I suggest
we move the projects dbmirror and dblink to gborg. The rserv contrib
module seems to me to be an early Perl prototype of erserver, nobody is
working on any more. I suggest we drop that entirely.
>
> Comments/alternatives?

I love the idea, but (there is always a "but," isn't there?)

I agree with the notion that "contrib" be removed from the main
distribution. There is, however, a disconnect between supporting projects
and the main system.

Take a look at the www.postgresql.org web site.  Most people visually
filter out the side bars. I've been looking over effectiveness of paid
advertisements in the various search engines, and the numbers are clear in
that the paid links at the top of the page get the hits while the side
hits get almost completely ignored. What I think this means is that people
looking for projects will simply filter out any reference to gborg.

What would be good, is to bring gborg a little closer to PostgreSQL by
putting a link in the main site menu. Rather than:

"Download - Mirrors - Lists - Users - Developers - Docs - Search"

We could have:

"Download - Docs - Lists - Search - Community - Contrib"

"Download" would be a unified version of the Download/Mirrors links on the
current site.

"Docs" Unchanged
"Lists" Unchanged
"Search" Unchanged
"Community" is a unified Users/Developers page.
"Contrib" is a link to GBorg.



Thu, 22 Apr 2004 17:19:43 -0400 (EDT)
pgsql@mohawksoft.com
Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions