On Jan 30, 2008 11:00 PM, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2008 9:59 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> > So someone will need to update that list very soon then. I don't think we can
> > release it as is.
> Howbeit I'll see about grabbing the existing buildfarm list of HEAD
> nodes that are running successfully, and turning that into a CALS
> table indicating platforms that seem to be working. (Actually, a
> quick review of the 3 that are presently red suggests that they have
> been building well lately, so I expect they only indicate transient
> I'll see about a patch tomorrow.
Attached is a patch.
I have changed the discussion to focus on the buildfarm process, and
it should be recognized that this does change the "shape" of how this
section recognizes platforms as being "supported."
In effect, the new approach is to only recognize platforms for which
there are buildfarm nodes compiling HEAD as being "supported," which
is definitely a change from the past.
This has the conspicuous effect that a number of platforms fall off
the list, notably:
- Red Hat
And there's an interesting paucity of IA-32 platforms. People are
much more likely to be running x86_64 than IA-32 for buildfarm nodes.
I actually don't have a problem with this. If anyone is embarrassed
that Red Hat and Slackware have dropped from the "supported" list,
then someone that cares may add a buildfarm node.
But I'm prepared for this to be considered controversial ;-)
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and
expecting different results." -- assortedly attributed to Albert
Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, Rita Mae Brown, and Rudyard Kipling
In response to
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2008-01-31 17:01:41|
|Subject: Re: Lack of docs for libpq C Library |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2008-01-31 16:44:53|
|Subject: Re: Lack of docs for libpq C Library|