Re: Release schedule (was Re: Improvement in SET commandsyntax)

> > 2) maintain a running list of porting problems. I've seen patches
> > submitted, and some patches applied, but *no* complete reports of "OK,
> > it works now" afterwards (I may be overstating this a bit, but you get
> > my point ;). But that contributes to...
>
> Practically all of the currently-outstanding reports have to do with
> updating regress test expected results. I made some progress on that
> last night but there are more to do. Our standards seem to be higher
> now than they used to be --- people are expecting all the tests to
> pass with no noise. So far, I don't think that anyone has reported
> regress test failures that actually suggest a porting problem.
>
> We do have a major problem with portability of plperl. I have yet
> to build a working version of it at all; in fact I haven't heard
> confirmation that it works from *anyone* other than the author.
> Has anyone else tried to use it?

Yes, I am inclined to disable the build for 7.0 final unless it works.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026