EOF of 8.2 is out of scope in this case because: a) I prefer to submit it as a separate case because then the title can be "EOF of PostgreSQL 8.2", which will be easier for other people to discover (rather than burying the message in the 8.4 case).
b) EOF of 8.2 is not directly related to the integration of 8.4. It's related to our EOL policy - which is time based. 8.2 enters EOL phase 2 in October 2010, and reaches EOSL in Oct 2013. So I have plenty of time to submit the EOF case separately. Mark Martin wrote: > James Gates wrote: >> I've attached the fast track proposal and a completed FOSS checklist >> (LSARC/2008/061). This case does not qualify for self review as there >> are several "ARC review required" answers in the checklist. But I've >> added an explanation beneath each of these answers. >> >> All questions can come to me. Timeout is set for next Thursday (18th). > I took a look and things look fine to me. Other than a (now) broken > link to the old caselog site in your References section, I saw little > difference between this and 2008/004 (no surprise). Why is EOF of 8.2 > out of scope, though? Was the EOF of 8.1 predicated on being >2 > releases old or because the db formats weren't compatible (and/or > ENOEASYUPGRADE)? > I noted that there was approximately 0 discussion on the 8.3 case > (2008/004), and no FOSS checklist then. That saddens me, somewhat, as I > am delighted to see Sun actually in lock-step with this particular > technology despite 2 very recent DB mergers, and I hope others are at > least a little excited about this particular product. -- Jim Gates Sun Microsystems Nashua, NH, USA http://sun.com/postgresql
