Tom Lane napsal(a):
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Am Tuesday, 29. July 2008 schrieb Greg Sabino Mullane:
What's not stable about having Python 2.5?
I mean "stable" to mean "does not change (unnecessarily)".
I really don't understand Peter's objection here. This thread has
a
Tom Lane wrote:
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I really don't understand Peter's objection here. This thread has
already consumed more person-time than I spent on applying the
back-patch.
Well I certainly wouldn't expec
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Someone taking the step from Python 2.4 to 2.5 might as well do a major
upgrade of PostgreSQL as well.
It takes a few seconds to upgrade Python versions, and I know I've
installed Python 2.5 from source on a production server before while not
touc
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I really don't understand Peter's objection here. This thread has
>> already consumed more person-time than I spent on applying the
>> back-patch.
> Well I certainly wouldn't expect us to feel obligated to spe
"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Am Tuesday, 29. July 2008 schrieb Greg Sabino Mullane:
>>> What's not stable about having Python 2.5?
>
>> I mean "stable" to mean "does not change (unnecessarily)".
>
> I really don't understand Peter's objec
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am Tuesday, 29. July 2008 schrieb Greg Sabino Mullane:
>> What's not stable about having Python 2.5?
> I mean "stable" to mean "does not change (unnecessarily)".
I really don't understand Peter's objection here. This thread has
already consumed more
Peter Eisentraut napsal(a):
Am Tuesday, 29. July 2008 schrieb Greg Sabino Mullane:
Why would anyone running PostgreSQL 8.1 in production upgrade their
stable server to Python 2.5, and remove Python 2.4 in the process?
Because the keep their operating system up to date, and because we still
do n
Am Tuesday, 29. July 2008 schrieb Greg Sabino Mullane:
> > Why would anyone running PostgreSQL 8.1 in production upgrade their
> > stable server to Python 2.5, and remove Python 2.4 in the process?
>
> Because the keep their operating system up to date, and because we still
> do not have any sort o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
>> I notice that we now have four buildfarm members failing in the 8.1
>> branch, with symptoms indicating that they are running python 2.5,
>> which pre-8.2 plpython has known incompatibilities with. I think
>> it's high time we back-patched t
Am Monday, 28. July 2008 schrieb Tom Lane:
> I notice that we now have four buildfarm members failing in the 8.1
> branch, with symptoms indicating that they are running python 2.5,
> which pre-8.2 plpython has known incompatibilities with. I think
> it's high time we back-patched those compatibil
On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 11:56 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I notice that we now have four buildfarm members failing in the 8.1
> branch, with symptoms indicating that they are running python 2.5,
> which pre-8.2 plpython has known incompatibilities with. I think
> it's high time we back-patched those co
I notice that we now have four buildfarm members failing in the 8.1
branch, with symptoms indicating that they are running python 2.5,
which pre-8.2 plpython has known incompatibilities with. I think
it's high time we back-patched those compatibility fixes ... they've
been in the field long enough
12 matches
Mail list logo
