Re: Add PostgreSQL 11 to feature matrix page? - Mailing list pgsql-www

On Jun 6, 2018, at 10:35 AM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

On Jun 6, 2018, at 9:09 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 1:59 AM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

On Jun 4, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

On May 24, 2018, at 10:09 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp> wrote:

[Moved to pgsql-www]

Sorry for the slow reply!

Adding PostgreSQL 11 to the page will give users at-a-glance-dfference
between 11 and previous releases, which could bring clearner image of
11 to the users.

I do like this idea, but there are a few things to consider:

1. Traditionally, we’ve waited until closer to release (I believe RCs) before
putting them up, due to the fact features can change. It is simple to remove
features from the feature matrix, but I think it’s part of the final packaging to
include the full list of features.

But by definition, all features in beta (at least major ones) are
freezed and should not be changed unless there's a serious
technical/none technical issue. So the features in the matrix would
not be changed we expect. Also one of the purposes of beta is
encouraging users to test out the beta. Adding to the page will give
more chances to potential beta testers, I think.

I don’t disagree. I need to make a test to see if this is possible with
the current pgweb configuration.

I will make a test on my local copy of pgweb to see how easy it is to add 11
to the list. I will report back if it is easy or not. If the former, I’ll make the suggestion
of adding it to the site and see if there are any objections.

So to get this to work we need to follow the standard process of adding in

a new version to the feature matrix:

1. Write a migration to support “v11” in the Feature model

2. Add in the new features

The one thing currently is that unless something in the code is changed, it

displays the full version number (e.g. “11”) without any indication of it being

in beta. Experimenting with the code, I don’t think it would be difficult to add

that in, but it is non trivial and I may have to change some of the sorting code

we are currently using.

tl;dr

If we’re ok with displaying “11” early without any indication of beta, this is trivial

and we just need to create the migration. If not, then it’s a bit of work, but it

may be worthwhile.

Thoughts?

I think it's perfectly fine to show it as 11. 

See attached for review. This follows the standard format we have used for

adding new versions to the feature matrix.