Stable vs Current (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha) - Mailing list pgsql-ports

From The Hermit Hacker
Subject Stable vs Current (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha)
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSF.4.05.9907301306040.78452-100000@thelab.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha  (Ryan Kirkpatrick <rkirkpat@nag.cs.colorado.edu>)
Responses Re: Stable vs Current (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha)
List pgsql-ports
On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Ryan Kirkpatrick wrote:

>     So, if I understand this correctly, the snapshot available on the
> FTP site is from the unstable tree, and there is a "stable 6.5.x" tree
> that can only be access by cvs{up}? And that this stable tree should not
> have quite as much delta from 6.5.1 as the snapshots do? Or did I miss
> something?

this is correct...

>     Hmm... I don't think other people want to roll in the alpha
> patches into the stable tree (with good reason). I think we are best off
> with just an alpha only version of pgsql via patches on 6.5.1, and leave
> integration of the alpha patches into the full pgsql source tree for 6.6.
> My two cents.

We are going to be rolling a v6.5.2, and .3, and .4 ... basically, until
v6.6 is released, v6.5.x is our stable release, and, from a commercial
perspective, has to be maintained.

I don't expect anyone working on -current to maintain it, I'm going to
work on it, but I do hope that if someone fixes a bug in -current that
exists in -stable, and that can be *easily* fixed, that we get the fix in
there also...

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org


pgsql-ports by date:

Previous
From: "Albert REINER"
Date:
Subject: Successful installation of PostgreSQL
Next
From: Louis Bertrand
Date:
Subject: Re: weird lib problem building PostgreSQL