From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Cc: | Hannes Dorbath <light(at)theendofthetunnel(dot)de>, Anton Melser <melser(dot)anton(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Postgres 8.2 binary for ubuntu 6.10? |
Date: | 2007-07-12 15:43:36 |
Message-ID: | 20316.1184255016@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 09:04:38AM +0200, Hannes Dorbath wrote:
>> This god like faith of some admins in package maintainers, that they
>> know what's right, good and stable for them, sometimes really worries me.
> The problem is the mismatch between what distrbuters want and what the
> postgres team wants. For distributors "stable" means no behavioural
> changes, whereas the postgresql team does bug fixes, some of which
> definitly make behavioural changes that would make previously working
> programs break.
I think we have a pretty good track record of not doing that except when
it's forced by a need to plug a security hole.
However, distributors certainly have more constraints than one could
wish. For instance, at Red Hat I can't just push a new Postgres update
into RHEL releases at my whim --- there are company constraints based on
available QA resources and suchlike. So sometimes the RHEL version of
PG lags behind the community version just because of manpower/scheduling
issues. They have been pretty good about letting me push security
updates promptly, though.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Aurynn Shaw | 2007-07-12 15:51:05 | Re: Mac OS X |
Previous Message | Andrew Edson | 2007-07-12 15:29:39 | Panic error on attempted update |