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

Re: Branch 1.14?

From: Erwin Brandstetter <brsaweda(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Branch 1.14?
Date: 2011-06-19 17:36:53
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgadmin-hackers
On Jun 15, 11:57 am, dp(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)pgadmin(dot)org (Dave Page) wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
> <guilla(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
> > We don't have both. We currently have a pgAdmin which supports
> > everything back to 7.3.
> No we don't. We have a pgAdmin, which it says on the website supports
> back to 7.3. I know I haven't run anything older than 8.0 for *years*,
> and certainly the QA guys at EDB don't. I don't believe Erwin does
> either. Therefore I don't believe we can honestly say we support back
> to 7.3.

My last contact with a pg < 8.2 is a couple of years back now. So, no,
I don't test those older versions.

After reading the thread, I would vote for something like this:
- Officially support (and actively care for) versions that pg
officially supports at release time.
- That doesn't mean we have to actively rip out older stuff as long as
it doesn't cause pain.
- IF older stuff is cause for complications, remove it.
- Communicate the policy to our users. Hint towards older versions for
older versions of pg. Maybe even a little table with matching version

Add something like this at and

"pgAdmin officially supports all officially supported versions of
PostgreSQL at release time. Older versions of the database should
mostly work, too. If you run into problems with an outdated version of
PostgreSQL you may want try an older version of pgAdmin."


In response to

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: TimwiDate: 2011-06-20 11:37:06
Subject: Another tiny UI bug
Previous:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2011-06-17 06:37:11
Subject: Re: Discussion - Search Objects

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