Marti Raudsepp <ma...@juffo.org> writes: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> What remaining issues are there blocking a 9.3.3 release?
> Well hardly a blocker since this has missed 2 releases already, but > I'm still hopeful to get many PGXS-based extensions to build again > without the dreaded "install: will not overwrite just-created ..." > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/52406191.6040...@dunslane.net AFAICT, the state of play on that is that it was reverted out of the non-devel branches immediately before the October releases (9.3.1 et al), on the grounds that it still seemed to be a moving target, cf http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1381193255.25702.4.ca...@vanquo.pezone.net I've not seen any further work on PGXS since commit eebdea08b, so maybe that complaint is no longer valid? On the other hand, dddc91ddd leaves the impression that all is not yet well in PGXS-land. > Thankfully I'm mostly using Debian so it's already patched for me. The Debian guys do seem remarkably willing to apply patches that upstream doesn't trust yet, don't they. Anyway, my opinion about this one is it's not a regression and therefore not a blocker, but I have no objection to fixing it in the back branches once we have consensus that the fix is stable. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
