On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I never considered tag'ng for minor releases as having any importance,
since the tarball's themselves provide the 'tag' ... branches give us the
ability to back-patch, but tag's don't provide us anything ... do
On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 06:41, Dan Langille wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I never considered tag'ng for minor releases as having any importance,
since the tarball's themselves provide the 'tag' ... branches give us the
ability to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Well, a tag makes it feasible for someone else to recreate the tarball,
given access to the CVS server. Dunno how important that is in the real
world --- but I have seen requests before for us to tag release points.
Any other arguments out
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 05 January 2003 01:10
To: Marc G. Fournier
Cc: Dan Langille; Peter Eisentraut; Greg Copeland; Bruce
Momjian; PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released
Greg Copeland writes:
Just a reminder, there still doesn't appear to be a 7.3.1 tag.
There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in
this project. Don't expect it to improve.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Greg Copeland writes:
Just a reminder, there still doesn't appear to be a 7.3.1 tag.
There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in
this project. Don't expect it to improve.
It was I who suggested that a release team
Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in
this project. Don't expect it to improve.
It was I who suggested that a release team would be a good idea.
We *have* a release team.
On Sat, 2003-01-04 at 04:27, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Greg Copeland writes:
Just a reminder, there still doesn't appear to be a 7.3.1 tag.
There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in
this project. Don't expect it to improve.
Well, I thought I remembered from
msg resent because I incorrectly copied/pasted some addresses.
Sorry.
On 4 Jan 2003 at 11:08, Tom Lane wrote:
Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases
in this project. Don't
msg resent because I incorrectly copied/pasted some addresses. Sorry.
On 4 Jan 2003 at 11:08, Tom Lane wrote:
Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases
in this project. Don't
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in
this project. Don't expect it to improve.
It was I who suggested that a release team would be a
--On Saturday, January 04, 2003 21:04:32 -0400 Marc G. Fournier
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in
this
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I never considered tag'ng for minor releases as having any importance,
since the tarball's themselves provide the 'tag' ... branches give us the
ability to back-patch, but tag's don't provide us anything ... do they?
Well, a tag makes it feasible for
Just a reminder, there still doesn't appear to be a 7.3.1 tag.
This is from the HISTORY file.
symbolic names:
REL7_3_STABLE: 1.182.0.2
REL7_2_3: 1.153.2.8
REL7_2_STABLE: 1.153.0.2
REL7_2: 1.153
Notice 7.3 stable but nothing about 7.3.x! I also see a 7.2.3,
On Sun, 2002-12-22 at 13:12, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Last night, we packaged up v7.3.1 of PostgreSQL, our latest stable
release.
Purely meant to be a bug fix release, this one does have one major change,
in that the major number of the libpq library was increased, which means
that everyone
Greg Copeland wrote:
On Sun, 2002-12-22 at 13:12, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Last night, we packaged up v7.3.1 of PostgreSQL, our latest stable
release.
Purely meant to be a bug fix release, this one does have one major change,
in that the major number of the libpq library was increased,
Last night, we packaged up v7.3.1 of PostgreSQL, our latest stable
release.
Purely meant to be a bug fix release, this one does have one major change,
in that the major number of the libpq library was increased, which means
that everyone is encouraged to recompile their clients along with this
17 matches
Mail list logo
