| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Added the Skytools extended transaction ID module to contrib as |
| Date: | 2007-10-10 14:57:42 |
| Message-ID: | 470CE866.7030205@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Robert Treat wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 October 2007 02:09, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 01:14 -0300, Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote:
>>
>>> Simon Riggs wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would prefer that we backported pg_standby into 8.2 contrib, so the
>>>> solution is where people need it to be. If not...
>>>>
>>> Don't know about the policy to put things in already-released-version
>>> but if it's not the case, we could at least put the code somewhere in
>>> the ftp.postgresql.org. IMHO pgfoundry project will confuse people.
>>>
>> Both: ftp and pgfoundry.
>>
>
> Putting it on pgfoundry would automatically put it in the ftp tree
> (ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/projects/pgFoundry) If it was to go on
> pgfoundry (which I'd recommend) I'd suggest removing it from 8.3 contrib
> before we release (cause having it in both places is really going to cause
> confusion)
>
>
One of pgfoundry's explicit purposes is for backports of features. Given
that we (rightly) don't backport new features in mainline releases,
where else should they go? I don't buy the "confusing" argument. If
necessary the author can plaster big red notices in a README on the
pgfoundry release saying "don't use this past postgres version x"
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-10 15:04:53 | Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-10-10 14:48:15 | Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-10 15:04:53 | Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-10 14:55:01 | Re: Locale + encoding combinations |