On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 01:14:18PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> That does not address the large-scale deployments where upgrades also
> take a very signifigant amount of time. If we are to provide them with
> the information ahead of the release, as they are trusted, I do not
> believe it makes any sense to prevent them from upgrading their systems
> until the information is out in the open.
But this does not only apply to the Heroku's of this world. What about the not
so hypothecial example I brought earlier? There are actually a lot of companies
out there that deploy Postgres on a large scale but are not DBaaS providers.
There are also alot of companies that somehow bundle Postgres with their
product and deliver it to *a lot* of customers. Their upgrade problem is even
worse. Do we add them all?
Besides some of these might get their packages from
service providers. Ok, in theory we could add those. But how about those who
use packages from one of the distros? With the same argument we would have to
go for a two step embargo.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL
