| From: | Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | gilberto(dot)castillo(at)etecsa(dot)cu |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Devrim Gündüz <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, pgsql-advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [MASSMAIL]Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |
| Date: | 2016-05-09 21:12:22 |
| Message-ID: | 5730FD36.1080208@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On 05/09/2016 02:04 PM, Gilberto Castillo wrote:
>
>> On 05/09/2016 01:58 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>>> So this is probably just highlighting how I'm not up to date on the
>>> -advocacy discussion :) But I thought the idea was to have it
>>> integrated, and that *that* was "the product" in this case. As in the
>>> "breaker that makes it possible to do transparent upgrades without
>>> external products". Which I thought was the target for next release, not
>>> this release. But I may be confusing multiple discussion, and as such
>>> contributing to the confusion.
>>
>> Yeah, there's multiple discussions, at least 2:
>>
>> 1. Should we promote pglogical in the beta as something to *test*?
>>
>> 2. Is pglogical a major-version-making feature?
>>
>
> In my opinion when we have a visual environment full amdinistración
> included in the core, will be version 10 while not.
That is not in anybody's plans for PostgreSQL. Assuming you mean a GUI?
--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gilberto Castillo | 2016-05-09 21:16:44 | Re: [MASSMAIL]Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |
| Previous Message | Gilberto Castillo | 2016-05-09 21:04:59 | Re: [MASSMAIL]Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |