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

Re: Going for Gold

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Andreas Pflug" <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>,"pgadmin-hackers" <pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Going for Gold
Date: 2004-11-29 14:43:31
Message-ID: E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4527B98@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackers
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgadmin-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org 
> [mailto:pgadmin-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of 
> Andreas Pflug
> Sent: 29 November 2004 10:24
> To: pgadmin-hackers
> Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] Going for Gold
> 
> Hi friends,
> 
> seems pgAdmin III 1.2RC is matured, should we make it Gold 
> now? Tom Lane promised to avoid further changes to the pgsql 
> system schema, so hopefully we won't face similar problems as 
> with beta4->beta5 again.
> 
> As soon as pgsql8.0 is out, we can roll 1.2.1 to update the 
> documentation to the release version, but we shouldn't delay 
> 1.2.0 for it.

Sounds good to me. Are the docs/screenshots/pg docs etc up to date?

I can probably roll it tomorrow.... (following which I'll branch for
-patches)

/D

Responses

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Andreas PflugDate: 2004-11-29 15:32:35
Subject: Re: Going for Gold
Previous:From: Troels ArvinDate: 2004-11-29 11:39:00
Subject: Re: Going for Gold

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