Re: minimum Meson version

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jelte Fennema-Nio
Тема Re: minimum Meson version
Дата
Msg-id CAGECzQQo8ZP2dqHNX+0Qwu_8paqrMja+d5EHfN7=atzJSwQnhA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: minimum Meson version  (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 at 07:38, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
> That's probably ok for developers, but then again, probably no one
> develops PostgreSQL master on RHEL 8.  But production RPM builds need to
> be done "in system", with the build tools being provided by
> vendor-supplied RPMs themselves, with all the signatures, attestations,
> and all that stuff that comes with it nowadays.

Okay, so maybe pip install is not what they want. But they could still
create a recent ninja & meson RPM themselves right. I assume they know
how to do that, because they'd need to do the same for PostgreSQL too
if they care about all the things you mentioned.

And what I just don't understand about this whole discussion: We're
talking about people who want to be frozen in time for 5 years
straight during this "maintenance support" window by the vendor (whom
they are paying), with only access to security fixes. But somehow they
do want to run the latest Postgres Major release, even though the one
that they had running still receives bug fixes and security fixes. I
just don't understand who these people are. Why do they care about
having no changes to their system to avoid breakage as much as
possible, except for their piece of primary database software, of
which they're happily running the bleeding edge.



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: