| From: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up |
| Date: | 2009-06-06 23:29:28 |
| Message-ID: | 4A2AFBD8.2040000@bluegap.ch |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Greg Stark wrote:
> For what it's worth that's certainly not true. Any user maintaining a
> patched version of the source tree for production use will want to
> merge in any patches for older releases. For example anyone using the
> CONNECT BY patch with 8.3 will surely want to take any 8.3 patch
> releases.
..or port that forward to 8.4, once it's released. To me it doesn't seem
that unreasonable to develop something on top of a stable branch and to
want to migrate that to a newer stable branch or HEAD later on. Git
could certainly help to reduce bit-rotting here, in my experience.
Regards
Markus Wanner
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Mielke | 2009-06-07 01:20:42 | Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up |
| Previous Message | Markus Wanner | 2009-06-06 23:03:05 | Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up |