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

Re: ARC patent

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org>,pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ARC patent
Date: 2005-01-18 23:48:00
Message-ID: 1106092080.22946.172.camel@localhost.localdomain (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 18:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I have already
> suggested to core that we should insist on 8.1 not requiring an initdb,
> so as to ensure that people will migrate up to it easily from 8.0.

So is it firm policy that changes that require a catversion update
cannot be made during the 8.1 cycle?

(Needless to say, it would be good to get this sorted out early on in
the 8.1 development cycle, to avoid the need to revert patches at some
point down the line. For those of us working on large projects that will
definitely require an initdb, it would also be good to know -- as this
policy will likely prevent that work from getting into 8.1)


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2005-01-19 00:10:29
Subject: Re: ARC patent
Previous:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2005-01-18 23:01:01
Subject: Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group