Re: Ole Streicher 2017-08-30 <d70bc62a-4f92-cb62-45d7-dce974e2c...@debian.org> > The idea here is to have just one binary package, containing the shared > libraries for all supported versions. Extensions are usually small, so > combining them in one package will not hurt. So, there would no > "postgresql-9.6-q3c" package anymore, d/control.in is removed, and > d/control is fixed (for one release). For convenience, I just attach the > complete d/control for postgresql-q3c. > > In that case, changing the supported postgresql versions will not change > the list of binary packages, but just the dependencies, which is IMO not > forbidden.
That is true, but it's totally different from what we have been doing so far. We would need to update all packages, and providing the necessary (?) transitional packages for existing users will be difficult. If a PG version goes out of support, the new package version wouldn't contain the module anymore, even if users are still using that PG version on their system. (Think Debian dist-upgrades.) It would also prevent (easily) building packages against beta/devel PG versions (10 and 11 at the moment). Or these packages would need to include the "normal" PG versions from the normal packages, plus the extra versions. The idea is intriguing, though. Maybe these problems have cute solutions and could be fixed. Christoph
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
