Re: [pgsql-www] Upcoming PG re-releases

["Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>]

'k, moved it all into OLD as well ... haven't removed anything until more 
opt in on this ... I do agree that if you really want that old, you can 
build from scratch, but I'm also not the one that went to the trouble of 
building the binaries :)


On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Magnus Hagander wrote:

> Someone suggested earlier that we should drop the binaries for
> nonsupported versions completely from the ftp site. Thoughts on this?
>
> If not, they should at least go into OLD as well. But personally, I'm
> for dropping them completely. If you're on something that old (heck, we
> have 7.0 binaries..), you can still build from source.
>
> Speaking of which, any reason not to drop the 8.1 beta win32 binaries?
>
> //Magnus
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pgsql-www-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > [mailto:pgsql-www-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Marc G. Fournier
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 7:31 PM
> > To: Robert Treat
> > Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org; pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org;
> > Tom Lane; Andrew Dunstan
> > Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] [HACKERS] Upcoming PG re-releases
> >
> >
> > Done, as well as moved all but the last two of each version after ...
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Robert Treat wrote:
> >
> > > On Wednesday 30 November 2005 11:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > Personally I expect to keep supporting 7.3 for a long
> > while, because
> > > > Red Hat pays me to ;-) ... and the EOL date for RHEL3 is a
> > long way away yet.
> > > > The PG community may stop bothering with 7.3 releases
> > before that.
> > > > But I think Marc and Bruce figure "as long as the patches
> > are in our
> > > > CVS we may as well put out a release".
> > >
> > > Yeah, thats one of the reasons I am skeptical about having official
> > > policies on this type of thing.  If Sun decided they wanted to
> > > maintain 7.2 and were going to dedicate developers and
> > testing for it,
> > > would we really turn that away?  OK, I don't really want to
> > have this
> > > discussion again, but as of now I think we are all agreed
> > that 7.2 is unsupported.
> > > > We hashed all this out in the pghackers list back in August, but I
> > > > agree there ought to be something about it on the website.
> > >
> > > We've been kicking it around but haven't moved much on this...
> > >
> > > Marc, can you move the 7.2 branches in the FTP under the
> > OLD directory?
> > > http://www.postgresql.org/ftp/source/
> > >
> > > We need to do the same with 7.2 documentation, moving them into the
> > > Manual Archive
> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/archive.html.
> > > We can also change the caption on the main documentation
> > page to note
> > > these are manuals for the current supported versions.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Robert Treat
> > > Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
> > >
> > > ---------------------------(end of
> > > broadcast)---------------------------
> > > TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
> >
> > ----
> > Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services
> > (http://www.hub.org)
> > Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org           Yahoo!: yscrappy
> >  ICQ: 7615664
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of
> > broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> >        choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> >        match

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664