Tom Lane wrote: > Red Hat 6.2 is still nominally supported (until March 31, it says here) > so I suppose there's a corporate compulsion to back-patch anything > that's labeled a security issue. But let's get real ... PG 6.anything > is stone-age code now. > > regards, tom lane > Red Hat Database project > > PS: I'm not taking a position on Justin's suggestion that there should > be a 7.2.4. Marc and Bruce would be the ones who have to do the work, > so they get to make the decision...
Who, us? Well, there is the confusion factor of releasing a patch to a superceeded major version. Wrapping it up and putting it out really isn't a big deal. Marc? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
