From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: back branches vs. VS 2008 |
Date: | 2011-01-03 19:59:30 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikymUr19wsq2K4JyfNQP_Ben-NphB_gL3+SsTRV@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 19:08, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>>> I'm not going to maintain more than one buildfarm member doing MSVC, and and
>>> if we were to adopt your policy I would not be able to use a modern-ish
>>> version of the compiler/SDK and also build all the live branches.
>
>> Well, it's perfectly possible to have more tha none version of MSVC on
>> the machine.
>
>> And we're not going to be changing the version that's actually used
>> for the official binary builds, so all you'll accomplish then is to
>> have the buildfarm test something different form what we're shipping.
>
> Are you speaking for EDB on that?
He's not speaking *for* us, but he's absolutely right.
--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-03 20:04:27 | Re: back branches vs. VS 2008 |
Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2011-01-03 19:59:16 | Re: Upgrading Extension, version numbers |