Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8999.1216785675@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution? ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into
PG core distribution?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes: > On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 23:29 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> There's a limit to how far you can go there, because just about any >> distro (other than maybe Gentoo) is going to be resistant to dropping in >> bleeding-edge versions. > We could have a quality committee? Something that says, "These 5 > packages are considered stable by PGDG". Those go into the various > repositories whether published directly to STABLE (or equiv) or are put > into something like Universe. I don't think you got the point: such pronouncements would have exactly zero influence on Red Hat, or any other distro I'm familiar with. The *assumption* is that upstream thinks their new release is stable, else they wouldn't have made it. The distros are in the business of not believing that, until more proof emerges --- preferably from their own testing. I know that this is the mind-set at Red Hat, and I'm pretty sure SUSE and Debian work the same way. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: