Re: [GENERAL] 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Lamar Owen wrote:
> > May I ask: is it necessary? Have there been version-bumping changes to
> > libpq since 7.0.x? (With the rate that necessary improvement is
> > happening to PostgreSQL, probably).

> No, only major releases have bumps.

> See pgsql/src/tools/RELEASE_CHANGES. I edit interfaces/*/Makefile and
> increase the minor number for every interface by one.

Thanks for the pointer.

> Let me add one thing on this RPM issue. There has been a lot of talk
> recently about RPM's, and what they should do, and what they don't do,
> and who should be blamed. Unfortunately, much of the discussion has
> been very unproductive and more like 'venting'.

> I really don't appreciate people 'venting' on these lists, especially
> since we have _nothing_ to do with RPM's. All we do is make the
> PostgreSQL software.

> What would be good is for someone to constructively make a posting about
> the known problems, and come up with acceptible solutions. Asking us to
> fix it really isn't going to help because we don't deal with RPM's here,
> and we don't have enough free time to make significant changes to meet
> the needs of RPM's.

Which is why I stepped up to the plate last year to help with RPM's.

I apologize if you took my post (which I edited greatly) as 'venting' --
it was not my intention to 'vent', much less offend. I just want to
know what to expect from the 7.1 release. I feel that that is germane
to the Hackers list, as the knowledge necessary to answer the question
is to be found on the list. (and you answered the question above).

Like it or not, in the eyes of many people having solid RPM's is a core
issue. If there are gotchas, I want to document them so people don't
get blindsided. Or work around them. Or ask why the change is
necessary in the first place.

I appreciate the fact that we are not here to make it easy for
distributors to package our software. I also appreciate the fact that
if you don't at least make an effort to work with major distributors
(and RedHat, TurboLinux, Caldera, and SuSE together comprise a major
userbase) that you run the risk of not being distributed in favor of an
inferior product.

I also appreciate and applaud the cross-platform mentality of the
PostgreSQL developers. Linux is far from the only OS to be supported by
PostgreSQL, true. But Linux is also the most popular OS for PostgreSQL
deployment.

However, there are known problems that can bite people who are not using
RPM's and are not running Linux. Some of those problems are such that
it will take someone with more knowledge than I currently possess to
solve. One is the issue of upgrading/migrating tools. This is not an
RPM-specific issue. To me, that is the only big issue that I have
spoken about in a way that could even remotely be construed as
'venting'. And it is not a Linux-specific issue. It is a core issue.

I'll shut up now, as I have cross-distribution RPM problems to solve.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11