-1

vs

There are two seperate products

  1. PgAdmin 3.
  2. PgAdmin 4.

PgAdmin doesn't currently mean anything until PgAdmin 3 dies off.

As you may know, many of us from the pgAdmin team have been hard at work on pgAdmin 4 for some time now. pgAdmin 4 is a complete rewrite of pgAdmin (the fourth, as you may guess), the previous version having reached the end of it's maintainable life after 14 years of development. (source)

PgAdmin 4 is a total rewrite. PgAdmin3 is a legacy product that is doomed to die. All of the bugs, and interfaces on it are not applicable to PgAdmin4. I suggest we nuke . Instead we should have

There likely won't be a needed for another 15 years. So we'll be good.

  • Are you proposing that pgadmin be renamed to pgadmin-3 (except for the four questions tagged pgadmin-4)? Are you certain that would be safe? – Paul White says GoFundMonica Mar 11 '17 at 0:47
  • It sounds less dangerously, less likely to confuse, and more future safe than the current state of affairs. But, I have not audited all 200 of those questions. Likely, all of them before 2016-09-29 (when pgadmin4 was released), are pgadmin-3 not sure which ones may have been lost in the crossfire – Evan Carroll Mar 11 '17 at 0:49
3

I disagree on removing tag / renaming to - but not strongly on adding it to old questions that apply.

With only 160 questions tagged , I don't see any benefit on renaming.

PgAdmin 4 is a total rewrite.

PgAdmin 4 is a total rewrite, yes. But do we really care if the program is written in C or Python? The functionality is very similar. The writers kept the same name after all. If it was renamed, it might be reasonable to use the new name as a tag.

PgAdmin3 is a legacy product that is doomed to die.

I suggest we wait until that happens. We've been getting questions (rare but still) about Postgres 7, 8.0, SQL Server 2000, MySQL 4.1, all products that are years past their end of life / support. I'd bet we'll get questions for PgAdmin3 for years to come, even if they become increasingly rare. After all, it has been - for 14 years - one of the most popular interfaces for accessing Postgres. Habits don't change easily.

All of the bugs, and interfaces on it are not applicable to PgAdmin4.

The bugs that might appear may of course not be similar but we can always tag with both and questions regarding the new version - and with both and for new questions regarding the old version.


No need for retagging the old questions either - although I wouldn't disagree on adding tag to the old ones that apply, if that can be done easily and without disrupting the site's front page.

  • It's a lot of talk but not much disagreement. PgAdmin 4 is a total rewrite, yes. But do we really care if the program is written in C or Python? The functionality is very similar. The writers kept the same name after all. If it was renamed, it might be reasonable to use the new name as a tag. It's a total rewrite. It has none of the same bugs and the interface is updated. Presumably, the writers kept the same name because it has the same authors, and the same community. Neither of which warrant a tag. – Evan Carroll Mar 11 '17 at 19:39
  • 2
    I'm only saying that my opinion is that we keep the pgadmin for questions of either version. Lets see what others have to say on this. – ypercubeᵀᴹ Mar 11 '17 at 19:44
  • I'm confused as to why you want that? The GUI is totally different. The bugs resulting are totally different? What do you see is similar in PgAdmin-3 and PgAdmin-4, writers kept the same name just doesn't like a good enough reason except insofar as to create confusion. – Evan Carroll Mar 11 '17 at 19:48
  • 1
    Yes, this is the obvious approach. The whole 'legacy' argument is irrelevant and it makes no difference if it is a total rewrite or not, it's still called 'pgadmin' for a good reason! – Jack Douglas Mar 13 '17 at 22:43

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .