Re: Martin Pitt 2013-05-20 <[email protected]>
> Hello Roger,
>
> Roger Leigh [2013-05-20 1:41 +0100]:
> > I've just uploaded postgresql-debversion to experimental (currently
> > in NEW) since it adds a postgresql-9.3-debversion package. This now
> > builds extensions for 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3.
This should really be dictated by what
/usr/share/postgresql-common/supported-versions outputs. If you are
using pg_buildext, that automates a bit (if not all) of the necessary
work. It will also make it easier to support the package on
apt.postgresql.org.
> > I was just wondering what the intention was for support of all these
> > versions in unstable and for jessie.
>
> Christoph and I talked about this the other day. So far the plan was
> to upload 9.3 to unstable once its release candidate is out. At this
> point we'll deprecate 9.1 from unstable, ask maintainers to update
> their extensions to 9.3, and remove 9.1 from unstable.
>
> I think 9.2 should never hit unstable, as it will only cause extra
> work to get rid of its reverse dependencies again.
>
> For Jessie I think we'll ship 9.3 or 9.4, depending on how long it
> takes this time. But as with previous Debian releases, the goal is to
> only support one major version, plus perhaps the old version's -plperl
> to faciliate upgrades.
>
> Does that sound ok?
Nod. Though I hope the {lib,pl}perl dance will not be necessary next
time, but who knows...
Christoph
--
[email protected] | http://www.df7cb.de/
_______________________________________________
Pkg-postgresql-public mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-postgresql-public
