Re: [HACKERS] v6.4.3 ?

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: jwieck(at)debis(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] v6.4.3 ?
Date: 1999-02-07 20:45:03
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.05.9902071644300.368-100000@thelab.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 7 Feb 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > 3. Test the second bugfix release with the result of step 2
> > and upgrade production. If the first bugfix release can
> > stand for a time long enough without further bugs
> > reported, use that for this step.
> >
> > 4. Follow subsequent bugfix releases if the fixes in them do
> > or could be expected to happen in the production.
> >
> > Doing it this way means, that a mission critical installation
> > will use v6.4.* until some time after we've put out at least
> > v6.5.1. Thus, we should care about them.
>
> Now I see why you patching against 6.4.

The arguments for a v6.4.3 make sense to me...tell me when you wish for
this to be created, and it shall be done :)

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter T Mount 1999-02-07 21:02:32 RE: [HACKERS] Problems with >2GB tables on Linux 2.0
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-02-07 20:36:34 Re: [HACKERS] equal: don't know whether nodes of type 600 are equal