| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Buildfarm member Narwhal: Python 2.5/8.1 |
| Date: | 2007-04-17 15:00:24 |
| Message-ID: | 21955.1176822024@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> The question in my mind is this: how much do we back-patch to cover new
>> and incompatible releases of software we depend on?
> I guess that depends on the invasiveness - in this case it's a couple of
> simple updates to the regression tests so I think it's probably worth doing.
It's not just the regression tests; there are at least two rounds of
patches in the C code --- plpython.c r1.90, r1.97, maybe r1.100.
Only the first of these has seen any testing "in the wild".
Another objection to patching 8.1 is why stop there ... why not 8.0,
etc?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2007-04-17 15:09:02 | Re: Buildfarm member Narwhal: Python 2.5/8.1 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-04-17 14:33:45 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: IDENTITY/GENERATED v36 Re: Final version of IDENTITY/GENERATED patch |