From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | Peter Childs <peterachilds(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: 8.3.0 release schedule (Was:Re: [BUGS] BUG #3852: Could not create complex aggregate) |
Date: | 2008-01-08 16:50:59 |
Message-ID: | 10269.1199811059@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 11:23:13AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We didn't include 8.3RC1 in the security announcement because Josh
>> wanted to make a separate announcement for it, but from every
>> perspective except the PR one, it's out.
> There has been no annonucement whatsoever. Our web site stll claims beta4
> is the current version. I was under the impression that this tarball, like
> all others, are considered preliminary until announced one way or another.
Uh, no, that isn't the project policy. If we were to find some fatal
problem in RC1 at this point, we'd spin an RC2, precisely because RC1
has been up on the servers for a couple days now and confusion would
inevitably result if we tried to redefine what RC1 was.
The lack of an announcement is not my bailiwick, but tarball-making
is. Once a tarball appears in the public FTP directories, it's
official, and there's no reason to discourage people from using it.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-01-08 17:11:17 | Re: 8.3.0 release schedule (Was:Re: [BUGS] BUG #3852: Could not create complex aggregate) |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-01-08 16:27:21 | Re: 8.3.0 release schedule (Was:Re: [BUGS] BUG #3852: Could not create complex aggregate) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2008-01-08 16:58:17 | Re: VACUUM FULL out of memory |
Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2008-01-08 16:38:38 | Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps |