Re: internal voting

From: "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu>, Iavor Raytchev <iavor(dot)raytchev(at)verysmall(dot)org>, "Bartus(dot) L" <bartus(dot)l(at)bitel(dot)hu>, Boyan Dzambazov <boyan(dot)dzambazov(at)verysmall(dot)org>, Boyan Filipov <boyan(dot)filipov(at)verysmall(dot)org>, Cmaj <cmaj(at)freedomcorpse(dot)info>, Constantin Teodorescu <teo(at)flex(dot)ro>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Stanislav Grozev <stanislav(dot)grozev(at)cees(dot)org>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: internal voting
Date: 2002-05-11 15:51:52
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0205111649490.2371-100000@ponder.fairway2k.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces

On Sat, 11 May 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

> Au contraire --- what the JDBC folk did (and still are doing) was to
> make "unofficial" releases consisting of snapshots pulled from their
> chunk of the CVS tree. There were people making use of the "7.2 branch"
> of JDBC long before the 7.2 server went beta, let alone final.
>
> Now this worked only because the JDBC driver makes a point of working
> with older server versions as well as current, so it was possible to
> use the updated driver with 7.1 and even older servers. I don't know
> whether pgaccess does or should have a similar policy, but if it does
> then the same approach should work well for it.

Ah, I'm just composing an email on this subject destined for the -interfaces
list.

>
> The alternative of maintaining a separate CVS tree and a separate
> release schedule would really force exactly that policy on pgaccess
> anyway --- if your releases aren't tied to the server's then you can
> hardly expect to be sure which server version people will try to use
> your code with.
>
> On the other hand, if the pgaccess developers would rather maintain
> separate pgaccess versions for each server version, I see no reason
> why they couldn't do that in the context of our CVS. They could work
> in the REL7_2 branch for now (and make releases from it) then merge
> forward to HEAD when they want to start thinking about 7.3 issues.
> Or double-patch if they want to work on both versions concurrently.

Really, I'd like interested parties to have look at waht I'm posting to
-interfaces so they can shoot down my ideas on this.

--
Nigel J. Andrews
Director

---
Logictree Systems Limited
Computer Consultants

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-05-11 15:59:44 Re: Further info : Very high load average but no cpu utilization ?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-05-11 15:51:37 Re: Nested transactions RFC

Browse pgsql-interfaces by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nigel J. Andrews 2002-05-11 16:50:52 PgAccess directory structure
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-05-11 15:15:02 Re: internal voting