On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Yes, but that doesn't make the user very happy--just better informed about > why they're dead in the water. I'd hate to see the next Long-Term support > version of Debian and Ubuntu, both likely to hang around a while, have > versions of pgAdmin that are fundamentally incompatible with the next PG > version, due in only a few months. Seems bad from an advocacy perspective. > And it looks like that's exactly how it's going to play out unless > something gets done very soon here, which I just realized myself today. pgAdmin 1.12 will be released before, or with PostgreSQL 9.0, so there won't be a version of Ubuntu shipping with an incompatible PostgreSQL and pgAdmin combination. That's how we've done it for the last 10 years or so. > Obviously backpatching past 1.10 is silly. There seem to be three > potentially useful ideas that would improve the state of this part of the > world: > > 1) The documentation update I already suggested, bringing the Ubuntu page > back to current and then reasonable to link on the main download section > again. > 2) Backpatch basic 9.0 support into a V1.10.2 release. That could work like > this: > > a) Release 1.10.2 with this fix ASAP--if that can't happen within a week or > less, the rest of what I'm suggesting is probably dead. There is zero chance I'll have time to produce a release in a week. I leave for Brussels tomorrow as do most of the rest of the active developers, and have a full calendar next week. Besides, there are far more changes required than just fixing one query - more so than we'd ever consider back porting, even if you did ignore the 9.0 feature enhancements. Off-the-top-of-the-head examples include: role/database GUC storage has completely changed and pg_trigger.tgiscontrainst is replaced by pg_trigger.tgconstraint (which has a slightly different meaning). > Doing just (3) is probably sufficient to make my problems go away, and now > that I know nobody else has that on their radar I'll start looking into it. I'm perfectly happy with that option. > Now that I realize the scope of the problem here, it would be nice to > consider a broader plan too. Anybody know Gerfried well enough to ping for > his opinion here? Don't know him at all. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgadmin-support mailing list (pgadmin-support@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-support
