From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <adunstan(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgbuildfarm(at)rjuju(dot)net |
Subject: | Re: what's going on with lapwing? |
Date: | 2025-03-06 16:57:05 |
Message-ID: | 33767ed0-1343-452f-84bd-0b3ccf7ab6c4@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025-03-06 Th 10:45 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 9:49 PM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> FWIW I installed the client version 19.1 this morning and forced a run on HEAD
>> and lapwing is back to green.
> Thanks, appreciate it.
>
> By the way, is there a particular reason why we're keeping Debian 7
> coverage in the buildfarm? I don't want to be in a huge rush to kill
> platforms people still care about, but it was pointed out to me
> off-list that this is quite an old release -- it seems Debian 7 was
> first released in 2013, last released in 2016, EOL in 2018. I assume
> that not too many people are going to install a PostgreSQL release
> that comes out in 2025 on an OS that's been EOL for 7 years (or 12
> years if the BF page is correct that this is actually Debian 7.0).
> Somewhat oddly, I see that we have coverage for Debian 9, 11, 12, and
> 13, but not 8 or 10. Is there a theory behind all of this or is the
> current situation somewhat accidental?
>
Fairly accidental, I think.
We do have a project at EDB at fill in certain gaps in buildfarm
coverage, so maybe we can reduce the incidence of such accidents.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | vignesh C | 2025-03-06 17:00:30 | Re: Commit fest 2025-03 |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2025-03-06 16:53:41 | Re: AIO v2.5 |