Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Date
Msg-id 8999.1216785675@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 23:29 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There's a limit to how far you can go there, because just about any
>> distro (other than maybe Gentoo) is going to be resistant to dropping in
>> bleeding-edge versions. 

> We could have a quality committee? Something that says, "These 5
> packages are considered stable by PGDG". Those go into the various
> repositories whether published directly to STABLE (or equiv) or are put
> into something like Universe.

I don't think you got the point: such pronouncements would have exactly
zero influence on Red Hat, or any other distro I'm familiar with.
The *assumption* is that upstream thinks their new release is stable,
else they wouldn't have made it.  The distros are in the business of
not believing that, until more proof emerges --- preferably from their
own testing.

I know that this is the mind-set at Red Hat, and I'm pretty sure
SUSE and Debian work the same way.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Next
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?