Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have shortened your paragraph to:
> Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix
> supported in previous releases, this port might have more bugs
> than other supported platforms in this release. Please
> test it thoroughly before using it in production.
> and made the change in release.sgml. Do we need more?
> Other wording I considered was:
> "we expect this port not to be as bug-free as other supported
> but that is close to a double-negative.
> In adding this now, I would also like to see a notice in a future
> release at the point we think Win32 is as bug-free as Unix (or as
> bug-free as the platform allows). (And this might happen in a minor
> 8.0.X release.)
> Again, my concern about this stuff is that you later have to undo what
> you said.
I would humbly suggest making some small corrections to make the overall
tone a little more upbeat. For example: instead of saying unsupported
operating systems are: (or not supported:), just reverse it and say
supported operating systems supported are:
As for the warning, maybe it's a little over cautious. I'm going to go
out on huge limb and say the user-level issues are not going to much
bigger than the usual headaches that accompany the x.0.0 releases that
get fixed shortly after release time. Why spread doubt among your own
A well worded statement might read:
"As with any new technology release, early adoption should be regarded
with caution until the database has been proving in a production
evironment. Database administrators should carefully analyze risk
before deploying on win32."
pgsql-hackers-win32 by date
|Next:||From: Dave Page||Date: 2004-08-26 14:17:25|
|Subject: Re: postmaster.pid |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-08-26 13:44:20|
|Subject: Re: Win32 release warning|