Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System

From: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,"Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>,"Ron Mayer" <ron(at)intervideo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System
Date: 2003-01-30 18:03:00
Message-ID: 200301301303.01065.lamar.owen@wgcr.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thursday 30 January 2003 11:12, Tom Lane wrote:
> A good point --- but what this is really about is expectations.  If we
> support a native Windows port then people will probably think that it's
> okay to run production databases on that setup; whereas I doubt many
> people would think that about the Cygwin-based port.  So what we need to
> know is whether the platform is actually stable enough that that's a
> reasonable thing to do; so that we can plaster the docs with appropriate
> disclaimers if necessary.  Windows, unlike the other OSes mentioned in
> this thread, has a long enough and sorry enough track record that it
> seems appropriate to run such tests ...

I think it's just developer backlash to Win32.  I am on record (see the 
archives) as not wanting the Win32 port -- but the vitriol I've seen in this 
thread from several people is entirely uncalled for and is sickening.

Dave appears to have tested this Win32 beta at least as much as a regular 
PostgreSQL release would be tested.  These tests are being held to 
artificially high standards, simply because it's native Win32.  That is 
disgusting.  And poor Katie just got _slammed_ -- and she's the lead 
developer.

Vince, I would say that we, the developers of PostgreSQL, are then not 
qualified to test our own releases for the reasons you mentioned that Katie 
should not test her own releases.   Of course that's ridiculous -- often the 
developers can do a better job of testing because they know better than the 
regular user would about what conditions can cause crashes.

I don't like the thoughts of native Win32 either.  I think Win32 should die a 
long horrible death.  But that doesn't give me the right to publicly ridicule 
the folks that want to use PostgreSQL, even if it's in an 'industrial 
strength setting,' on Win32.  The BSD license indemnifies us anyway.  So 
what's the problem.

The developers don't like Win32.  That's the problem.

But as to 'industrial strength testing' -- do ANY of our releases get this 
sort of testing on ANY platform? No, typically it's 'regression passed'  'Ok, 
it's supported on that platform.'
-- 
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Joerg HessdoerferDate: 2003-01-30 18:11:04
Subject: Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System
Previous:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2003-01-30 17:20:47
Subject: Re: v7.2.4 bundled ...

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group