David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:56:33PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > So, if Sun, SRA, Pervasive, Command Prompt, etc were to submit a patch for
> > v7.2, we'd refuse it?
>
> That depends on what you mean by "refuse." Such a patch wouldn't
> resurrect the original Postgres
> > That would be fairly trivial ... let me add it to the 'todo
> list' ...
> > I take it that it would be safe to relegate the
> /pub/source/OLD stuff
> > there too?
>
> Not so trivial to put behind a web interface or the download
> tracker though. Is it really necessary to have a separate
; Marc G.
Fournier; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tom Lane; Andrew Dunstan
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Upcoming PG re-releases
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 1. Dezember 2005 11:35 schrieb Euler Taveira
de Oliveira:
What about an museum.postgresql.org to
gnus Hagander; Marc G.
> Fournier; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tom Lane; Andrew Dunstan
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Upcoming PG re-releases
>
> On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> > Am Donnerstag, 1. Dezember 2005 11:35 schrieb Euler Taveira
> de Oliveira:
> >&g
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 1. Dezember 2005 11:35 schrieb Euler Taveira de Oliveira:
What about an museum.postgresql.org to keep the old releases?
That gave me a good laugh, but there is something to be said about moving all
no longer supported releases (accord
Csaba Nagy wrote:
Maybe "mausoleum" would be even better name :-D
Come on people, it's clearly: elephants-graveyard.postgresl.org
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send a
Maybe "mausoleum" would be even better name :-D
Cheers,
Csaba.
On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 11:35, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote:
> --- Richard Huxton escreveu:
>
> > If it's practical to keep them, I'd like to suggest doing so. If it's
> > not practical, could we have a where_to_find_old_versions.t
Am Donnerstag, 1. Dezember 2005 11:35 schrieb Euler Taveira de Oliveira:
> What about an museum.postgresql.org to keep the old releases?
That gave me a good laugh, but there is something to be said about moving all
no longer supported releases (according to the criteria that are being
discussed)
--- Richard Huxton escreveu:
> If it's practical to keep them, I'd like to suggest doing so. If it's
> not practical, could we have a where_to_find_old_versions.txt file
> and
> open a project on sourceforge to keep them?
>
What about an museum.postgresql.org to keep the old releases?
Euler T
Robert Treat wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 13:33, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Someone suggested earlier that we should drop the binaries for
nonsupported versions completely from the ftp site. Thoughts on this?
If not, they should at least go into OLD as well. But personally, I'm
for dropping them co
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:56:33PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, David Fetter wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 01:23:38PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
> >>On Wednesday 30 November 2005 11:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>>Personally I expect to keep supporting 7.3 for a long while,
I see this as an excellent reason to draw a bright, sharp line between
what vendors support and what the community as a whole does,
especially where individual community members wear another hat.
So, if Sun, SRA, Pervasive, Command Prompt, etc were to submit a patch
for v7.2, we'd refuse it
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, David Fetter wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 01:23:38PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 11:40, Tom Lane wrote:
Personally I expect to keep supporting 7.3 for a long while,
because Red Hat pays me to ;-) ... and the EOL date for RHEL3 is a
long way a
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 13:33, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Someone suggested earlier that we should drop the binaries for
> nonsupported versions completely from the ftp site. Thoughts on this?
>
> If not, they should at least go into OLD as well. But personally, I'm
> for dropping them completely. If
t Treat
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Tom Lane; Andrew Dunstan
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Upcoming PG re-releases
Done, as well as moved all but the last two of each version after ...
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Robert Treat wrote:
On Wednesday 30 November 2
gt; To: Robert Treat
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> Tom Lane; Andrew Dunstan
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Upcoming PG re-releases
>
>
> Done, as well as moved all but the last two of each version after ...
>
>
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2005,
Done, as well as moved all but the last two of each version after ...
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Robert Treat wrote:
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 11:40, Tom Lane wrote:
Personally I expect to keep supporting 7.3 for a long while, because Red
Hat pays me to ;-) ... and the EOL date for RHEL3 is a
17 matches
Mail list logo
