From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: wrapping up this CommitFest (was Re: knngist - 0.8) |
Date: | 2011-03-01 20:09:01 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikTrdgqheA277=QhB-VpdaPFstndOWQN0E-pSnw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Ideally, we want to have some binaries/packages for the "final alpha".
>>> Those broaden testing considerably.
>
>> When we have a version that needs that treatment, we can simply call
>> it beta1. If it's too half-baked for that, then I don't see the point
>> in going to a lot of trouble to build packages.
>
> We (or more precisely EDB) made Windows installers for alpha1:
> http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/pgdevdownload
> And IIRC they did installers for alphas in the 9.0 cycle too. And
> certainly Devrim and others have been building binary packages for
> alphas. If this alpha is so much less baked than the previous ones
> that that's not worthwhile, there's something very wrong with the
> process. The last alpha ought to be in testable condition.
Oh, really? OK. I wasn't aware that alphas got installers.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dan Ports | 2011-03-01 20:09:58 | Re: SSI bug? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-03-01 20:08:05 | Re: wrapping up this CommitFest (was Re: knngist - 0.8) |