On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 6:56 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 06:03:16PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Joshua D. Drake" writes:
>> > I mean, it took us forever to require Perl 5.8.
>>
>> ... and we still make a point of not having a hard requirement for
>> that. If you don't want p
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 06:03:16PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" writes:
> > I mean, it took us forever to require Perl 5.8.
>
> ... and we still make a point of not having a hard requirement for
> that. If you don't want plperl, you can build from a tarball with
> no perl at all.
>
"Joshua D. Drake" writes:
> I mean, it took us forever to require Perl 5.8.
... and we still make a point of not having a hard requirement for
that. If you don't want plperl, you can build from a tarball with
no perl at all.
Given the project history, I can't see us turning a dependency
we just
On Sep 22, 2010, at 2:08 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> It's not about naming platforms for exclusion. It's about requiring
> functionalities for *in*clusion.
Passes all tests.
David
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http:/
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 14:08 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> It's not about naming platforms for exclusion. It's about requiring
> functionalities for *in*clusion.
I repeat:
> Perhaps you could suggest some more specific ideas of your proposal?
I mean, it took us forever to require Perl 5.8.
Josh
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 02:02:18PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 13:58 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 04:28:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > David Fetter writes:
> > > > We can start by supporting only platforms git runs on, this being
> > > > the f
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 13:58 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 04:28:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > David Fetter writes:
> > > We can start by supporting only platforms git runs on, this being
> > > the first in what I'd picture as a set of base requirements.
> >
> > Sounds lik
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 04:28:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter writes:
> > We can start by supporting only platforms git runs on, this being
> > the first in what I'd picture as a set of base requirements.
>
> Sounds like allowing the tail to wag the dog.
"Runs git" is actually not a b
On 09/22/2010 04:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:17 PM, David Fetter wrote:
What say?
"No." :-)
I'd be fine with dropping support for ancient platforms if it lets us
do something cool that we can't otherwise do, but there's no value in
doing it just because we can.
C
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:17 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> What say?
"No." :-)
I'd be fine with dropping support for ancient platforms if it lets us
do something cool that we can't otherwise do, but there's no value in
doing it just because we can.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterpri
David Fetter writes:
> We can start by supporting only platforms git runs on, this being the
> first in what I'd picture as a set of base requirements.
Sounds like allowing the tail to wag the dog.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 13:17 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> Folks,
>
> While it's interesting to note, in an historical sense, that a
> platform most recently updated when 1999 was still in the future, I
> think it's time we did a little pruning.
>
> We can start by supporting only platforms git run
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 01:17:54PM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> Folks,
>
> While it's interesting to note, in an historical sense, that a
> platform most recently updated when 1999 was still in the future, I
> think it's time we did a little pruning.
>
> We can start by supporting only platforms
On 9/22/10 1:17 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> While it's interesting to note, in an historical sense, that a
> platform most recently updated when 1999 was still in the future, I
> think it's time we did a little pruning.
It is unclear to me what problem you're trying to solve.
--
Folks,
While it's interesting to note, in an historical sense, that a
platform most recently updated when 1999 was still in the future, I
think it's time we did a little pruning.
We can start by supporting only platforms git runs on, this being the
first in what I'd picture as a set of base requi
15 matches
Mail list logo
