Re: 8.2.0 Tarball vs. REL8_2_0 vs. REL8_2_STABLE
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 8.2.0 Tarball vs. REL8_2_0 vs. REL8_2_STABLE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4586F212.3070904@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | 8.2.0 Tarball vs. REL8_2_0 vs. REL8_2_STABLE (was: [GENERAL] pgcluster-1.7.0rc1-patch) ("Matt Miller" <pgsql@mattmillersf.fastmail.fm>) |
Ответы |
Re: 8.2.0 Tarball vs. REL8_2_0 vs. REL8_2_STABLE
Re: 8.2.0 Tarball vs. REL8_2_0 vs. REL8_2_STABLE Re: 8.2.0 Tarball vs. REL8_2_0 vs. REL8_2_STABLE |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Matt Miller wrote: >> When I apply pgcluster-1.7.0rc1-patch to Postgres REL8_2_STABLE I get >> a handful of rejects. >> > > The patch applies to the 8.2.0 tarball without rejects and without > fuzz. That's good. Now on to some fun with pgcluster... > > However, the patch will not apply to cvs branch REL8_2_0. This all > raises the question: what's the difference between REL8_2_STABLE, > REL8_2_0, and the 8.2.0 tarball? > > > STABLE doesn't mean static. It's the branch for what will be the 8.1.x series. But REL8_2_0 should correspond pretty closely to the tarball, I believe. Until we see the rejects it's hard to tell what the problem is, though. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: