Hi, > Downgrading for no reason could bring us to big trouble and bad user experience
+1 to this. Let's keep PostgreSQL 9.3. Regards, Alex On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Artem Silenkov <asilen...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Hello! > > Vote for update. > > 1. We have already shipped 9.3 in fuel-7.0. Downgrading such complicated > package without any reason is not good thing at all. User experience could > suffer a lot. > 2. The next reason is tests. We have tested only 9.3, 9.2 was not tested > at all. I'm sure we could bring serious regressions by downgrading, > 3. Postgres-9.3 is not custom. It was taken from KOJI packages and > backported without any modification. It means that this package is > officially tested and supported by Fedora, which is good. > 4. One shipped package more is not a huge burden for us. It was officially > backported from official sources, tested and suits our need perfectly. Why > do we need to play such dangerous games downgrading for no reasons? > > Let me notice that all packages are maintained by mos-packaging team now > And we are perfectly ok with postgres-9.3. > > Downgrading for no reason could bring us to big trouble and bad user > experience. > > Regards, > Artem Silenkov > --- > MOs-Packaging > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Bartłomiej Piotrowski < > bpiotrow...@mirantis.com> wrote: > >> On 2015-12-14 13:12, Igor Kalnitsky wrote: >> > My opinion here is that I don't like that we're going to build and >> > maintain one more custom package (just take a look at this patch [4] >> > if you don't believe me), but I'd like to hear more opinion here. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Igor >> > >> > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1523544 >> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/249656/ >> > [3] http://goo.gl/forms/Hk1xolKVP0 >> > [4] https://review.fuel-infra.org/#/c/14623/ >> > >> > >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> > Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > >> >> I also think we should stay with what CentOS provides. Increasing >> maintenance burden for something that can be implemented without bells >> and whistles sounds like a no-go. >> >> Bartłomiej >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev