From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, PostgreSQL www <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: stable snapshots... |
Date: | 2009-07-14 02:31:09 |
Message-ID: | 5525.1247538669@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> Not sure about the usefulness of the extra stable tarballs ... doesn't
>> most of the back patching happen just as we are about to release the new
>> versions?
> Not sure where you got that idea. There are plenty of times when
> somebody (mostly Tom) commits a bugfix and tells the reporter, stating
> that the release date of the new version is some undetermined point in
> the future. Not everyone is able to grab the patch from CVS and apply
> it; my guess is that most people simply wait for the next stable
> release. Those people would benefit from having the older stable
> branches, so here's a +1 to Stefan's idea.
Yeah. When we have fixed a bug but not yet released an official version
with the fix, somebody who needs that bug fix has three choices:
* manually apply the patch to a recent tarball;
* pull from CVS;
* use a nightly snapshot.
The first two cases require having extra tools like appropriate bison
and flex versions (which right now is looking like a bigger deal than
I would wish :-().
If we can build nightly snapshots for a release or two back without
undue effort, I think it'd be a useful service.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2009-07-14 03:28:06 | Re: stable snapshots... |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-07-14 02:05:26 | Re: stable snapshots... |