Thread: 1.4.2?

1.4.2?

From
Dave Page
Date:
Seems to me we might be about ready for 1.4.2. Any objections? If not, I'll
look at wrapping it sometime next week.

Regards, Dave.


Re: 1.4.2?

From
Andreas Pflug
Date:
Dave Page wrote:
> Seems to me we might be about ready for 1.4.2. Any objections? If not, I'll
> look at wrapping it sometime next week.

Go.

Regards,
Andreas

Re: 1.4.2?

From
Raphaël Enrici
Date:
Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>
>>Seems to me we might be about ready for 1.4.2. Any objections? If not, I'll
>>look at wrapping it sometime next week.
>
>
> Go.

Hi,

any reason why the patch concerning "double linkage"[1] issue has not
been applied?

Regards,
Raphaël
[1] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgadmin-hackers/2005-12/msg00170.php


Re: 1.4.2?

From
"Dave Page"
Date:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raphaël Enrici [mailto:blacknoz@club-internet.fr]
> Sent: 04 March 2006 22:27
> To: Andreas Pflug
> Cc: Dave Page; pgadmin-hackers
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] 1.4.2?
>
>
> any reason why the patch concerning "double linkage"[1] issue has not
> been applied?
>
> Regards,
> Raphaël
> [1]
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgadmin-hackers/2005-12/msg00170.php

Hi Raph,

Mainly because it got overlooked (sorry). It won't go onto the stable branch anyway though - we never had a bug report
aboutit (just the patch), and I'm not prepared to modify that code with virtually zero field testing to 'fix' it in
1.4.x.

Regards, Dave.

Re: 1.4.2?

From
Raphaël Enrici
Date:
Dave Page wrote:
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Raphaël Enrici [mailto:blacknoz@club-internet.fr]
>>Sent: 04 March 2006 22:27
>>To: Andreas Pflug
>>Cc: Dave Page; pgadmin-hackers
>>Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] 1.4.2?
>>
>>
>>any reason why the patch concerning "double linkage"[1] issue has not
>>been applied?
>>
>>Regards,
>>Raphaël
>>[1]
>>http://archives.postgresql.org/pgadmin-hackers/2005-12/msg00170.php
>
>
> Hi Raph,

Hi Dave,


> Mainly because it got overlooked (sorry). It won't go onto the stable branch anyway though - we never had a bug
reportabout it (just the patch), 

At least we got one bug report... see bug #341117 at debian.org [1] :)

> and I'm not prepared to modify that code with virtually zero field testing to 'fix' it in 1.4.x.

I tested it myself ;) Just joking, I fully understand your position.
However, can you please consider adding it for next release? I'll keep
trace of it separately in debian packages until it's included upstream.

Cheers,
Raph
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=341117


Re: 1.4.2?

From
"Dave Page"
Date:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raphaël Enrici [mailto:blacknoz@club-internet.fr]
> Sent: 06 March 2006 08:08
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Andreas Pflug; pgadmin-hackers
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] 1.4.2?
>
> > Mainly because it got overlooked (sorry). It won't go onto
> the stable branch anyway though - we never had a bug report
> about it (just the patch),
>
> At least we got one bug report... see bug #341117 at debian.org [1] :)

s/we/debian :-)

> > and I'm not prepared to modify that code with virtually
> zero field testing to 'fix' it in 1.4.x.
>
> I tested it myself ;) Just joking, I fully understand your position.
> However, can you please consider adding it for next release?
> I'll keep
> trace of it separately in debian packages until it's included
> upstream.

Certainly. Of course, you are welcome to apply a platform specific mod to 1.4.2 for Debian only as it'll obviously work
there.I'm more worried aboout breaking Solaris/FreeBSD etc. 

Regards, Dave

Re: 1.4.2?

From
Raphaël Enrici
Date:
Dave Page wrote:
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Raphaël Enrici [mailto:blacknoz@club-internet.fr]
>>Sent: 06 March 2006 08:08
>>To: Dave Page
>>Cc: Andreas Pflug; pgadmin-hackers
>>Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] 1.4.2?
>>
>>
>>>Mainly because it got overlooked (sorry). It won't go onto
>>
>>the stable branch anyway though - we never had a bug report
>>about it (just the patch),
>>
>>At least we got one bug report... see bug #341117 at debian.org [1] :)
>
>
> s/we/debian :-)

Debian -> community & I -> we ;)



>>>and I'm not prepared to modify that code with virtually
>>
>>zero field testing to 'fix' it in 1.4.x.
>>
>>I tested it myself ;) Just joking, I fully understand your position.
>>However, can you please consider adding it for next release?
>>I'll keep
>>trace of it separately in debian packages until it's included
>>upstream.
>
>
> Certainly. Of course, you are welcome to apply a platform specific mod to 1.4.2 for Debian only as it'll obviously
workthere. I'm more worried aboout breaking Solaris/FreeBSD etc. 

mmmh take a look at the patch... Should be ok.
Maybe other maintainers could try it and report?

Regards,
Raph

Re: 1.4.2?

From
"Dave Page"
Date:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raphaël Enrici [mailto:blacknoz@club-internet.fr]
> Sent: 06 March 2006 08:19
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Andreas Pflug; pgadmin-hackers
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] 1.4.2?
>
> mmmh take a look at the patch... Should be ok.

I have, and yes, it /should/, but I've seen enough weird link failures caused by missing libs that were thought not to
beneeded for it to make me nervous. You can obviously test it properly on Debian though, so it you want a port specific
patchI don't object. 

I'll certainly apply the patch in trunk though (perhaps modified a little as I've been rehashing much of that code
recently).

Regards, Dave