From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
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 15:09:02 |
Message-ID: | 4624E30E.60308@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> 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".
Ahh - missed that bit.
> Another objection to patching 8.1 is why stop there ... why not 8.0,
> etc?
8.0 didn't have the PL regression tests and as it appeared to be a
regression test issue...
I'll disable python on < 8.2.
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-04-17 15:58:55 | Unhelpful debug tools on OS X :-( |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-04-17 15:00:24 | Re: Buildfarm member Narwhal: Python 2.5/8.1 |