On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>
> We have had the discussion before, and I was pretty sure it ended up
> in "yes, it should be fixed". But it doesn't change the fact that the
> repository claimed there had been no changes for *7 months*, certainly
> not 3 days. Which also agrees very well with the logs on
> git.postgresql.org.
I'm not disputing that, and never have.
> So clearly there is something that doesn't work in this process.
It works exactly as it always has. No, I haven't got round to
automating the pushes yet, largely because I've had 1001 other things
to do, the vast majority of which will benefit far more users and
community members in one way or another. I wasn't aware that you
considered this to be such a high priority item compared to all the
other tasks I have on my plate.
> Yeah. I guess you're just not bothering to tag releases anymore? that
> confused me on that point.
Yes, we tag them. I just forgot that GIT pulls tags automatically, but
doesn't push them. I've corrected that now.
> Well, IMNSHO, just being available under an open source license *if
> asked for*, should be well below where a reasonable bar would be put
> for this.
Maybe, but that's a different discussion. By your own admission you've
been well aware that we made the installers available under an OSS
licence in this way for a long time which implies consent, casual
discussion about improving the push frequency aside - as is the norm
in community matters. You certainly haven't nudged me about this, or
made me aware (until now) that you consider it to be a high priority.
> But in treating people the same - I just asked Scottie to make sure
> that they're not available just when asked for, but all the time. Can
> you do the same?
Sure, I'll bump it up the list and try to do it today. What do you
consider more important, this or the CFP?
--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
