| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christoph Berg <christoph(dot)berg(at)credativ(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Package version in PG_VERSION and version() |
| Date: | 2018-01-17 14:56:20 |
| Message-ID: | 16176.1516200980@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Christoph Berg <christoph(dot)berg(at)credativ(dot)de> writes:
> Re: Tom Lane 2018-01-17 <15537(dot)1516200157(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
>> IMO there's not really any evidence that we need an additional mechanism
>> in this space. I don't see any way to get that evidence unless some
>> packager tries to use the existing mechanism and hits insurmountable
>> problems.
> The problem is that the problems will likely not be in my/our/Debian's
> realm, but in anything that uses our packages downstream. E.g. the
> "official" Docker images are using our packages. There is no way to
> test that external stuff without actually publishing the packages for
> production consumption.
Yeah, but the same argument could be made against the variant
you're proposing. In theory, people could have written arbitrarily
brittle checks of version numbers/strings. I'm not exactly convinced
that it's your (or our) problem if they did.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Geoff Winkless | 2018-01-17 15:00:54 | Re: proposal: alternative psql commands quit and exit |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-01-17 14:50:04 | Re: proposal: alternative psql commands quit and exit |