On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > For example, Debian ships with 20140328, which produces the attached > diff. > > I'm not sure if we want to go to whatever is a "common version on most > > platforms" today, or just "whatever is latest" if we do upgrade. AFAICT > > RHEL 7 seems to be on 20121207, RHEL 6 on 20090616. And in Ubuntu, 14.04 > > has 20120701, 16.04 has 20140328, and current devel has 20140328. In > > general there seems to be very little overlap there, except Debian and > > Ubuntu covers the same versions. > > here's the changelog > https://metacpan.org/source/SHANCOCK/Perl-Tidy-20180220/CHANGES > > The wikipedia page claims that the latest stable release is 20160302, > but that seems to be just because the page is out of date (last update > is before the following 2017-05 release) > > It's hard to form an opinion based on this. I don't think picking one > because of its availability in some distribution is useful, since almost > everyone is going to have to download a custom one anyway, whichever > distribution we pick -- unless it's mine, of course, hah. > > I think we should just pick some recent one and use it for X years; use > that one for all backbranches. I propose X=3. I propose 20170521 > (newer ones seem to cater for stuff that I think we mostly don't use). > 20140328 seems to cover *most* versions. Another argument for that one would be it's the one that we have on Borka, which is where we build the official release tarballs, so we can use that as a stable fallback. Those are both fairly weak arguments though. As long as we have good instructions for how to make a local install of it that doesn't affect the rest of the system, then that should not matter. And we need such instructions anyway, since it won't be on every distribution. -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
