[CentOS] On Community

Fri Jun 3 22:12:37 UTC 2011
Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com>

On 6/3/2011 3:53 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Friday, June 03, 2011 03:49:00 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 6/3/2011 1:28 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
>>> Go back and look at the changelogs of the PostgreSQL packages.
>
>> Give me a hint about what to look for.  As I recall I always installed
>> postgresql from source in those days because the disto packages were so
>> far behind or broken.
>
> So, did you provide community-based feedback to the then PostgreSQL RPM packager?  Any bugzilla entries?  Any e-mails?  Anything?
>
> Sounds like the packager at the time could have used some good feedback, instead of you bailing out, installing from source.

Don't really recall, but my best guess is that I used whatever support 
or community email/forum/newsgroup I could find for postgresql and 
followed their advice.  And back then the advice from the upstream 
projects was often to install their latest version instead of what the 
distro included.  Not sure exactly when the concept of 'updates' came 
around so that there would have been a reasonable possibility for timely 
fixes either.  I remember using freshrpms with an apt-for-rpm somewhere 
along the line but that sort of blurred the distinction between official 
update rpms and 3rd party versions.

> And this is the Community in CentOS; as you have defined it here in this thread, Les. The users, not the developers; the ones who provide good feedback, but don't necessarily build (develop) the system.  Your definition was:
> "[The community is]  not the development community that pushes wild and crazy changes into fedora that I'm talking about."  (antecedent of your 'it's' in the original is in brackets).
>
> This same community is here, and it's vibrant.  I see many of the same names I've seen for over ten years.  Doing essentially the same thing, and giving feedback if they're not actively developing or packaging.  Some are a tad more crotchety than before, but it's a familiar community.
>
> Oh, I almost forgot to mention: I *was* the community packager at the time.  And I could have used more useful, constructive, non-trollish feedback at the time.  Like I got from Sander Steffann, Kaj Niemi, Alvaro Herrera and the tireless developer to whom I handed the packager role, Devrim Gunduz, who is doing outstanding work in that role even today.  A vibrant developer community, one I miss, to tell you the truth.

Sorry, I didn't think of packaging as a creative process back then and 
was more concerned with the mod_perl problems where I thought the issues 
were well known but not addressed across many RH releases (and then 
broken again after they finally got it right in 7.3).  Now that things 
are more stable and mostly work I do understand your point about fixing 
the distro instead of bypassing it.  There's still the issue with 
postgresql about major-rev upgrades needing a dump/load that you 
probably can't address sensibly with rpm's non-interactive restriction, 
though.

> The rh.com contact/packager changed a few times, but I was the community packager from 6.1 or so through a good part of FC2's development.  Log in to a CentOS 4 machine that has postgresql installed from CentOS-Base repo, and issue a 'rpm -q --changelog postgresql' and scroll up a couple of dozen lines or so from the end (date tagged Fri Nov 21 2003).  The PostgreSQL core developer Tom Lane took the Red Hat internal reins, and is still there (employed by Red Hat and in the PostgreSQL Core Team).  Tom does outstanding work.  PostgreSQL, just to name one project, is very much helped by Red Hat, in upstream Core roles.

I suspect I bailed on the packaged version in the 4.x or 5.x days and 
didn't track it's progress closely.  Probably did use it on CentOS 4 for 
a while running RT, but the related perl packages were something of a 
nightmare to maintain.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com