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

Re: Versions RSS page is missing version(s)

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Versions RSS page is missing version(s)
Date: 2010-01-31 17:59:52
Message-ID: 9837222c1001310959u43fbe786k11d7672f8e633ed7@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-www
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 18:34, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>> yet, so that page should be listing 7.4.27. Further, shouldn't we be keeping
>>> even 'unsupported' versions on this page, so (e.g. case of check_postgres.pl)
>>> clients can check if they have the latest revision, even if the major/minor
>>> combo is super old?
>
>> No, I don't think we should. We should list supported versions only.
>> And check_postgres could be advised to throw a warning at least if
>> you're running an unsupported version ;)
>
> I'm not sure how useful that is. Surely while we encourage people to run
> a recent major version, we also want to encourage people who will not
> or cannot upgrade to at least be running the latest revision of a branch,
> no matter how old it is?

We don't support 7.3. Not even if you run the latest version.


> How about a compromise? We add a new field to that XML so we can state
> that it is unsupported, but leave it in there. That way, programs such
> as check_postgres can not only distinguish between old but valid versions
> and invalid versions (e.g. "7.typo.oops") but can act in a more intelligent
> way for unsupported versions. Heck, maybe an estimated end-of-life date
> field for all versions as well?

How do you add that field in a backwards compatible way? Meaning that
people or tools relying on it should *not* see 7.3 or 6.1 or whatever.
And it needs to be done within the RSS spec (which does allow custom
namespaces though, so that may not be a problem)

As for an estimated end-of-life, yes, we could definitely add that.
Now that we finally have it :-)


> Either way, please add 7.4 back in. :)

Done, will be on in the next site rebuild.

-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2010-02-01 02:27:24
Subject: Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-01-31 17:51:10
Subject: Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-01-31 19:02:38
Subject: Re: Problems backing up
Previous:From: Steve AtkinsDate: 2010-01-31 17:56:13
Subject: Re: Best practice for file storage?

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