Обсуждение: rc1 or beta4?
The current plan (or, the last one I recall) is to push another 9.1 release tomorrow, for Monday release. Are we going with beta4 or rc1? -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 14:00 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > Are we going with beta4 or rc1? RC1: http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/19869.1312298345@sss.pgh.pa.us Regards, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ Principal Systems Engineer @ EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer Community: devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr http://www.gunduz.org Twitter: http://twitter.com/devrimgunduz
2011/8/17 Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@gunduz.org>: > On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 14:00 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> Are we going with beta4 or rc1? > > RC1: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/19869.1312298345@sss.pgh.pa.us In Tom's final email to the -core thread he mentions I see now that he did say RC1. I thought we were voting on the date though (not that I have a problem with it being RC1). -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes:
>>> Are we going with beta4 or rc1?
> In Tom's final email to the -core thread he mentions I see now that he
> did say RC1. I thought we were voting on the date though (not that I
> have a problem with it being RC1).
Well, if this one's not ready to be an RC then I think we can forget
about pushing out a final during September ...
regards, tom lane
Hello, Dave. You wrote: DP> The current plan (or, the last one I recall) is to push another 9.1 DP> release tomorrow, for Monday release. Are we going with beta4 or rc1? +1 for RC1 DP> -- DP> Dave Page DP> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com DP> Twitter: @pgsnake DP> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com DP> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- With best wishes,Pavel mailto:pavel@gf.microolap.com
On 17/08/11 15:00, Dave Page wrote: > The current plan (or, the last one I recall) is to push another 9.1 > release tomorrow, for Monday release. Are we going with beta4 or rc1? Sorry to butt in, but it would probably be good to include fixes for the two segfault plpython bugs[1] before wrapping up the release. Cheers, Jan [1] http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4E4BCD52.90804@wulczer.org
On 17 August 2011 16:47, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org> wrote:
On 17/08/11 15:00, Dave Page wrote:Sorry to butt in, but it would probably be good to include fixes for the
> The current plan (or, the last one I recall) is to push another 9.1
> release tomorrow, for Monday release. Are we going with beta4 or rc1?
two segfault plpython bugs[1] before wrapping up the release.
It's not listed as a beta-blocker yet. I take it that it should?
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org> wrote: > On 17/08/11 15:00, Dave Page wrote: >> The current plan (or, the last one I recall) is to push another 9.1 >> release tomorrow, for Monday release. Are we going with beta4 or rc1? > > Sorry to butt in, but it would probably be good to include fixes for the > two segfault plpython bugs[1] before wrapping up the release. And Ashesh's fix for building against ActiveState Python 3.2: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-08/msg00836.php. Care to review that one? :-) -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 17/08/11 17:50, Thom Brown wrote: > On 17 August 2011 16:47, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org> wrote: > >> On 17/08/11 15:00, Dave Page wrote: >>> The current plan (or, the last one I recall) is to push another 9.1 >>> release tomorrow, for Monday release. Are we going with beta4 or rc1? >> >> Sorry to butt in, but it would probably be good to include fixes for the >> two segfault plpython bugs[1] before wrapping up the release. >> > > It's not listed as a beta-blocker yet. I take it that it should? Oh, in the wiki? I don't know, it is a segfault-causing bug, but all I wanted was to draw some attention in case the people wrapping the release missed that thread. Jan
On 17 August 2011 16:56, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org> wrote:
On 17/08/11 17:50, Thom Brown wrote:Oh, in the wiki? I don't know, it is a segfault-causing bug, but all I
> On 17 August 2011 16:47, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org> wrote:
>
>> On 17/08/11 15:00, Dave Page wrote:
>>> The current plan (or, the last one I recall) is to push another 9.1
>>> release tomorrow, for Monday release. Are we going with beta4 or rc1?
>>
>> Sorry to butt in, but it would probably be good to include fixes for the
>> two segfault plpython bugs[1] before wrapping up the release.
>>
>
> It's not listed as a beta-blocker yet. I take it that it should?
wanted was to draw some attention in case the people wrapping the
release missed that thread.
It was my understanding that the only things which can prevent a new beta or release candidate are listed on the wiki (http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.1_Open_Items). There's only one item on the list now, and I think even that has probably been fixed. If it's not on there, I guess it hasn't yet been considered to be something which can block a release. Since it's not even listed as a non-blocker either, I don't think it's been reviewed in this context.
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > On 17 August 2011 16:56, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org> wrote: >> >> On 17/08/11 17:50, Thom Brown wrote: >> > On 17 August 2011 16:47, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org> wrote: >> > >> >> On 17/08/11 15:00, Dave Page wrote: >> >>> The current plan (or, the last one I recall) is to push another 9.1 >> >>> release tomorrow, for Monday release. Are we going with beta4 or rc1? >> >> >> >> Sorry to butt in, but it would probably be good to include fixes for >> >> the >> >> two segfault plpython bugs[1] before wrapping up the release. >> >> >> > >> > It's not listed as a beta-blocker yet. I take it that it should? >> >> Oh, in the wiki? I don't know, it is a segfault-causing bug, but all I >> wanted was to draw some attention in case the people wrapping the >> release missed that thread. > > It was my understanding that the only things which can prevent a new beta or > release candidate are listed on the wiki > (http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.1_Open_Items). There's only > one item on the list now, and I think even that has probably been fixed. If > it's not on there, I guess it hasn't yet been considered to be something > which can block a release. Since it's not even listed as a non-blocker > either, I don't think it's been reviewed in this context. That doesn't mean other things can't or shouldn't be fixed - just that they won't necessarily cause adjustment of the schedule to accomodate them. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> writes: > On 17 August 2011 16:56, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org> wrote: >> On 17/08/11 17:50, Thom Brown wrote: >>> It's not listed as a beta-blocker yet. I take it that it should? >> Oh, in the wiki? I don't know, it is a segfault-causing bug, but all I >> wanted was to draw some attention in case the people wrapping the >> release missed that thread. > It was my understanding that the only things which can prevent a new beta or > release candidate are listed on the wiki ( > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.1_Open_Items). There's only > one item on the list now, and I think even that has probably been fixed. If > it's not on there, I guess it hasn't yet been considered to be something > which can block a release. Since it's not even listed as a non-blocker > either, I don't think it's been reviewed in this context. I think you're imagining a lot more structure than actually exists in this project ;-). Anybody can edit that page, and there's no necessary consequence of something being written there. It's just notes to help us keep track of issues, not something graven on stone tablets. The pg_upgrade thing is listed as a beta blocker because I put it there --- but that's just my opinion. If it had proven hard to fix we might have concluded that we wouldn't let it block a beta release. If the plpython thing is a new crash that didn't exist before 9.1, my feeling is that it's a blocker. regards, tom lane
On 08/17/2011 09:42 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > I think you're imagining a lot more structure than actually exists in > this project ;-). Anybody can edit that page, and there's no necessary > consequence of something being written there. It's just notes to help > us keep track of issues, not something graven on stone tablets. > > The pg_upgrade thing is listed as a beta blocker because I put it there > --- but that's just my opinion. If it had proven hard to fix we might > have concluded that we wouldn't let it block a beta release. > > If the plpython thing is a new crash that didn't exist before 9.1, > my feeling is that it's a blocker. > > regards, tom lane > I can confirm that the bug in pg_upgrade has been fixed with Bruce's patch in commit 2411fbdac448045a23eebf4f0dbfd5790ebad720 Thanks Dave Byrne
Dave Byrne <dbyrne@mdb.com> writes:
> I can confirm that the bug in pg_upgrade has been fixed with Bruce's patch
> in commit 2411fbdac448045a23eebf4f0dbfd5790ebad720
Thanks, I marked it resolved on the wiki page.
regards, tom lane
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > That doesn't mean other things can't or shouldn't be fixed - just that > they won't necessarily cause adjustment of the schedule to accomodate > them. +1 -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services