On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 16:50, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Stefan Kaltenbrunner <ste...@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes: >> Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> I think this should be working now. I made this change to mk-snapshot, >>> and a similar one to mk-stable_snapshot. I have run the snapshot >>> generation for master, and the one for 8.4 should finish in a >>> minute or so. I have disabled the cronjobs until someone else has >>> verified the tarballs. > > Do you still need someone to do that, and what do you want done exactly?
Just a second set of eyes that the output looks reasonable for being a snapshot generated now. >>> When I do, I'll also enable generation of snapshots of REL9_0_STABLE. >>> We currently do back to 8.2 - should we keep that, or drop 8.2? > >> hmm I would say we should do all supported branches because those are >> the ones that people might be interested in when looking for a fix on a >> branch... > > FWIW, I think back to 8.2 is sufficient. The branches earlier than that > are going to be unsupported in a matter of weeks anyway. And if no one > has complained about the lack of nightly tarballs for them to date, > it's unlikely that they'll start complaining now. Ok. 8.2 it is then - and I'll add 9.0 -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers