| From: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Ready to roll beta |
| Date: | 2004-09-08 08:45:36 |
| Message-ID: | 413EC6B0.1020502@pse-consulting.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgadmin-hackers |
Dave Page wrote:
>
> Yes, but to do that (properly) I need to produce the tarball first.
> That's the best way to ensure consistent releases. Or are you saying
> that we ignore consistency in this instance?
I don't understand the problem. The binary is for pginstaller only, and
its supporting files (languages) might differ slightly from the official
pgAdmin3 beta release (if we allow it) which we wouldn't publish and
announce until cvs is tagged.
The version number of pgAdmin3 that's included in pgInstaller should
reflect that it is functionally identical to pgAdmin3 Beta1.
How should this affect consistency?
Regards,
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2004-09-08 08:51:10 | Re: Ready to roll beta |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2004-09-08 08:31:53 | Re: Ready to roll beta |