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

Re: Old git repo

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Old git repo
Date: 2010-12-31 12:10:36
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 4:58 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 03:04, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
>>> Personally, my utility for the old repo is not much (if it was anything
>>> important, I wouldn't have relied on the unofficial repo). But we should
>>> probably give a little bit of warning for folks that might want to
>>> rebase or translate some old notes.
>> Well, I guess the question is how much warning.  I suggested O(1 week)
>> but Robert seems to want O(1 year).  As long as there's some agreed
>> deadline, I'm not very picky about what it is.
> I don't need to get rid of it *now*, but I agree a deadline is good.
> How about we either say "when 9.1 is released", or we say "september
> 2011" because that's a year after we made the switch?

Either of those would be fine with me.


Robert Haas
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Aidan Van DykDate: 2010-12-31 12:33:19
Subject: Re: Sync Rep Design
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-12-31 11:51:55
Subject: Re: Sync Rep Design

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