Re: 9.2beta web issues

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> That list's traffic seems a bit on the low side -- surely we've had
>> people testing more recently than September 2011.
>
> pgsql-testers is what we're talking about?

Yes.

> 9/2011 would be when the last beta phase ended, and after that would
> have been a period where zero traffic could be expected. Presumably
> people have forgotten about the special list since then, accounting for
> the lack of 9.2beta reports in that list. But even before that, the
> traffic looks darn thin.

Yeah, I'm not sure the plan to get people over there ever really
worked. And most likely this was because the hackers weren't really
onboard with the plan...

So let's just get rid of the list (well, move it to inactive lists).

I'm looking at what it takes to add the beta version to the bugs form.
Right now that's driven by the same boolean field that controls which
versions are listed as supported on places like the frontpage of the
site, which is probably not the best idea to do - so I'll go add
another field that controls this, and then get that deployed shortly.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/