Re: Linux download pages weirdness

On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 12:13 PM Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 11:01 AM Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 11:45 AM Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 10:35 AM Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ref: /download/linux/debian/ (and others)
>>>>
>>>> The section "included in distribution" starts by saying postgres is in
>>>> the debian distribution, and then goes on to say that *our* repository
>>>> contains a bunch of other things, and then lists some of them. It's also
>>>> weird that we list "pg repo", "deb repo", "repo contents", "backports repo".
>>>>
>>>> The same is true for the RedHat download pages (but not suse, because
>>>> they lack the basic information)
>>>>
>>>> I think this is a result of many rounds of incremental updates -- or
>>>> does somebody actually think this makes sense?
>>>>
>>>> To fix it I think we should create a subsection for "available
>>>> packages".
>>>>
>>>> For RedHat, should we also even bother with the "post installation"
>>>> section, now that it's fully included in the instructions if you use the
>>>> dropdowns at the top? It's not really our job to document what RedHat does
>>>> -- that's in the RedHat docs, no?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And finally, since we now have our own SuSE repos, shouldn't the SuSE
>>>> download instructions also get the kind of functionality that the redhat
>>>> ones have?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, that whole mess is something Jonathan and I were planning to look
>>> at revising - which is why we started collecting outbound link click info
>>> to help guide us. I've been busy with other things the last couple of weeks
>>> though, and am out next week, but hopefully when I get back I can get onto
>>> it. We should also have click data following a release then, which may be
>>> useful.
>>>
>>>
>> Oh, that's what you were working on :)
>>
>> That said -- there is not a single link in the areas I'm talking about,
>> so I'm not entirely sure we're talking about the same thing? :) This is all
>> purely about the informational text/tables.
>>
>
> Right - we're planning to look at the wider downloads section, not just
> those particular parts.
>
>

Excellent! I guess that means I'm off the hook for now :)

//Magnus