Thread: RC1 on Monday?
Does anyone have anything outstanding that holds off an RC1? Seen alot of changes over the past week, but mostly in the docs ... haven't seen anything that I think is 'major' that would require a Beta4, anyone else?
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > Does anyone have anything outstanding that holds off an RC1? > Seen alot of changes over the past week, but mostly in the docs ... > haven't seen anything that I think is 'major' that would require a Beta4, > anyone else? The only thing I'm concerned about is Jan's report from Tuesday: http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1020754 If that's real it seems like a release-stopper; but he hasn't come back with any more info, not even enough to let other people try to reproduce it. regards, tom lane
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > > Does anyone have anything outstanding that holds off an RC1? > > Seen alot of changes over the past week, but mostly in the docs ... > > haven't seen anything that I think is 'major' that would require a Beta4, > > anyone else? > > The only thing I'm concerned about is Jan's report from Tuesday: > http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1020754 > > If that's real it seems like a release-stopper; but he hasn't come back > with any more info, not even enough to let other people try to reproduce > it. How are we on the ports? We still have BeOS issues, right? HPUX looks OK, I think, because it was a compiler problem. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> How are we on the ports? We still have BeOS issues, right? HPUX looks
> OK, I think, because it was a compiler problem.
I think Peter is working on the uint8-configuration issue.
HPUX is okay except we might want to use a different geometry regression
file for HPUX 11. Waiting for Conway to get back on that. IRIX
geometry may need tweaking too.
We're apparently not there yet on getting libpq to report socket error
message texts on all flavors of Windows. However, it's no worse than
it was in 7.1, and better on at least some flavors. I'm willing to call
it done for 7.2, and see what we can do better in 7.3.
Unresolved report of porting problem on R4000 (from Hiroshi).
Some docs issues still to be cleaned up; the biggest one being that
Thomas still has committed no documentation for the timestamp/interval
precision features.
None of the above look like RC1 stoppers to me, though.
regards, tom lane
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > How are we on the ports? We still have BeOS issues, right? HPUX looks > > OK, I think, because it was a compiler problem. > > I think Peter is working on the uint8-configuration issue. > > HPUX is okay except we might want to use a different geometry regression > file for HPUX 11. Waiting for Conway to get back on that. IRIX > geometry may need tweaking too. > > We're apparently not there yet on getting libpq to report socket error > message texts on all flavors of Windows. However, it's no worse than > it was in 7.1, and better on at least some flavors. I'm willing to call > it done for 7.2, and see what we can do better in 7.3. > > Unresolved report of porting problem on R4000 (from Hiroshi). > > Some docs issues still to be cleaned up; the biggest one being that > Thomas still has committed no documentation for the timestamp/interval > precision features. > > None of the above look like RC1 stoppers to me, though. Well, seeing as we aren't supposed to be doing _any_ tweeking after RC1 unless we can help it, it seems these may delay things. (Docs/regression we can tweek.) If we can get the BeOS and R4000 stuff done, or decide we don't want to get it done for 7.2, I think we are a go. I guess that was my issue, that we do have a few ports in flux, and it would be nice to have these all nailed down by Monday, and the docs/regression if possible. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
...
> Some docs issues still to be cleaned up; the biggest one being that
> Thomas still has committed no documentation for the timestamp/interval
> precision features.
Hmm. Thought I had done something on that. Anyway, I'm wading through
the docs to prepare hardcopy, which always finds some markup or wording
changes too. RC1 is not the release though, so it doesn't seem to me to
be necessary to wait for.
- Thomas
> ... > > Some docs issues still to be cleaned up; the biggest one being that > > Thomas still has committed no documentation for the timestamp/interval > > precision features. > > Hmm. Thought I had done something on that. Anyway, I'm wading through > the docs to prepare hardcopy, which always finds some markup or wording > changes too. RC1 is not the release though, so it doesn't seem to me to > be necessary to wait for. Yes, I sure thought that was done. Maybe Tom had something else in mind. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Yes, I sure thought that was done. Maybe Tom had something else in
> mind.
I'm talking about timestamp(n), interval(n), current_timestamp(n),
etc etc. If that stuff is documented, I don't see where.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > > Does anyone have anything outstanding that holds off an RC1? > > Seen alot of changes over the past week, but mostly in the docs ... > > haven't seen anything that I think is 'major' that would require a Beta4, > > anyone else? > > The only thing I'm concerned about is Jan's report from Tuesday: > http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1020754 > > If that's real it seems like a release-stopper; but he hasn't come back > with any more info, not even enough to let other people try to reproduce > it. I was pretty sure that I was awake when I saw it. But I'm not able to reproduce it any more. So for the moment I take anything back and claim the opposite. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com # _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com