Re: Buildfarm vs. Linux Distro classification

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Buildfarm vs. Linux Distro classification
Date: 2006-09-11 17:08:21
Message-ID: 200609111908.21955.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Lately there have been some buildfarm registrations for "Debian
> testing/unstable" or similarly described machines. I have kicked back
> against these, as the description seems to me to be far too open
> ended.

Then again, it would be useful to actually test on Debian
testing/unstable (or pre-release branches of other OS), because that
would (a) expose problems with new toolchains and such earlier than in
released versions, and (b) provide advance testing for when testing
becomes the release. Consider, the number of users that will run 8.2
on Debian stable is probably going to be less than the number of users
who will run 8.2 on what today is testing.

I agree that the lack of a fixed version designation is unsatisfactory.
I'm not sure whether that is actually necessary, though. If PostgreSQL
doesn't work on some machine, then that's a problem anyway.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2006-09-11 17:10:18 Re: Emacs local vars at the tail of every file
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2006-09-11 16:51:39 Re: Fixed length data types issue