Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote: Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I never considered tag'ng for minor releases as having any importance, since the tarball's themselves provide the 'tag' ... branches give us the ability to back-patch, but tag's don't provide us anything ... do they? Well, a tag makes it feasible for someone else to recreate the tarball, given access to the CVS server. Dunno how important that is in the real world --- but I have seen requests before for us to tag release points. FWIW, in the real world, a release doesn't happen if it's not taqged. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 06:41, Dan Langille wrote: On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote: Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I never considered tag'ng for minor releases as having any importance, since the tarball's themselves provide the 'tag' ... branches give us the ability to back-patch, but tag's don't provide us anything ... do they? Well, a tag makes it feasible for someone else to recreate the tarball, given access to the CVS server. Dunno how important that is in the real world --- but I have seen requests before for us to tag release points. FWIW, in the real world, a release doesn't happen if it's not taqged. Agreed! Any tarballs, rpms, etc., should be made from the tagged source. Period. If rpm's are made from a tarball that is made from tagged source, that's fine. Nonetheless, any official release (major or minor) should always be made from the resulting tagged source. This does two things. First, it validates that everything has been properly tagged. Two, it ensures that there are not any localized files or changes which might become part of a tarball/release which are not officially part of the repository. I can't stress enough that a release should never happen unless source has been tagged. Releases should ALWAYS be made from a checkout based on tags. -- Greg Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] Copeland Computer Consulting ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Well, a tag makes it feasible for someone else to recreate the tarball, given access to the CVS server. Dunno how important that is in the real world --- but I have seen requests before for us to tag release points. Any other arguments out there? FWIW, I use the tags often in some scripts that rely on the output of 'cvs status -v'. Seeing REL7_3_STABLE at the top of the Existing Tags list is a bit disconcerting when you know that it's not true. My scripts assume that the latest release should always be tagged. Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200208 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: http://www.turnstep.com/pgp.html iD8DBQE+GE1NvJuQZxSWSsgRAh/1AKCPEKQeQ3OnKzbeSl5DXstnwwiFPQCfQ2mn KplkOouzodJqZvQNN2tk8Fk= =OaZY -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
-Original Message- From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 January 2003 01:10 To: Marc G. Fournier Cc: Dan Langille; Peter Eisentraut; Greg Copeland; Bruce Momjian; PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ... Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I never considered tag'ng for minor releases as having any importance, since the tarball's themselves provide the 'tag' ... branches give us the ability to back-patch, but tag's don't provide us anything ... do they? Well, a tag makes it feasible for someone else to recreate the tarball, given access to the CVS server. Dunno how important that is in the real world --- but I have seen requests before for us to tag release points. Any other arguments out there? I've often found tags useful when ppl have reported bugs that have occured between version - A quick way to see the changes that might have introduced the new bug when browsing though a web interface. Regards, Dave. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
Greg Copeland writes: Just a reminder, there still doesn't appear to be a 7.3.1 tag. There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in this project. Don't expect it to improve. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Greg Copeland writes: Just a reminder, there still doesn't appear to be a 7.3.1 tag. There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in this project. Don't expect it to improve. It was I who suggested that a release team would be a good idea. I think that was soundly rejected. I still think it's a good idea. If only to ensure that things are properly tagged, the right annoucements go out at the right times, that a code freeze goes into effect, etc. These concepts are not new. A release is an important step in the life cycle. I volunteered to document the release procedure as it resides only within lore and a couple of heads. I have yet to start. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote: There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in this project. Don't expect it to improve. It was I who suggested that a release team would be a good idea. We *have* a release team. Your problem is that Marc, who is the man who would need to do this, doesn't appear to consider it an important thing to do. Try to convince him to put it on his checklist. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
On Sat, 2003-01-04 at 04:27, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Greg Copeland writes: Just a reminder, there still doesn't appear to be a 7.3.1 tag. There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in this project. Don't expect it to improve. Well, I thought I remembered from the release team thread that it was said there was a punch list of things that are done prior to actually releasing. If not, it certainly seems like we need one. If there is one, tagging absolutely needs to be on it. If we have one and this is already on the list, seems we need to be eating our own food. ;) -- Greg Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] Copeland Computer Consulting ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
msg resent because I incorrectly copied/pasted some addresses. Sorry. On 4 Jan 2003 at 11:08, Tom Lane wrote: Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote: There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in this project. Don't expect it to improve. It was I who suggested that a release team would be a good idea. We *have* a release team. I have a suggestion. Let us document who is the release team and who is responsible for each step of the release. Perhaps that is the problem: a lack of process. I'll add that to my list of things I've promised to do. -- Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
msg resent because I incorrectly copied/pasted some addresses. Sorry. On 4 Jan 2003 at 11:08, Tom Lane wrote: Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote: There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in this project. Don't expect it to improve. It was I who suggested that a release team would be a good idea. We *have* a release team. Your problem is that Marc, who is the man who would need to do this, doesn't appear to consider it an important thing to do. Try to convince him to put it on his checklist. Marc? Is this true? You don't consider it important to tag the release? I'm quite sure that's not the case and that Marc does consider it important. It's just something which he forgot to do. A recent post by Greg Copeland implies this item is on his checklist. IMHO, it is vital that the tree is properly tagged for each release. AFAIK, a tag can be laid with with respect to timestamp value. So why don't we just do it? -- Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote: Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote: There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in this project. Don't expect it to improve. It was I who suggested that a release team would be a good idea. We *have* a release team. Your problem is that Marc, who is the man who would need to do this, doesn't appear to consider it an important thing to do. Try to convince him to put it on his checklist. I never considered tag'ng for minor releases as having any importance, since the tarball's themselves provide the 'tag' ... branches give us the ability to back-patch, but tag's don't provide us anything ... do they? That said, I can back-tag the whole source tree for past releases if ppl do think it is important, its just a matter of knowing the 'timestamp' to base it on, which I can do based on the dates of the tar files ... Its not like tag'ng is hard to do ... ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
--On Saturday, January 04, 2003 21:04:32 -0400 Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Tom Lane wrote: Dan Langille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote: There is a long tradition of systematically failing to tag releases in this project. Don't expect it to improve. It was I who suggested that a release team would be a good idea. We *have* a release team. Your problem is that Marc, who is the man who would need to do this, doesn't appear to consider it an important thing to do. Try to convince him to put it on his checklist. I never considered tag'ng for minor releases as having any importance, since the tarball's themselves provide the 'tag' ... branches give us the ability to back-patch, but tag's don't provide us anything ... do they? That said, I can back-tag the whole source tree for past releases if ppl do think it is important, its just a matter of knowing the 'timestamp' to base it on, which I can do based on the dates of the tar files ... It's useful for those using the CVS files to RECREATE a version based on the TAG to checkout something (without pulling the whole tarball). LER Its not like tag'ng is hard to do ... ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I never considered tag'ng for minor releases as having any importance, since the tarball's themselves provide the 'tag' ... branches give us the ability to back-patch, but tag's don't provide us anything ... do they? Well, a tag makes it feasible for someone else to recreate the tarball, given access to the CVS server. Dunno how important that is in the real world --- but I have seen requests before for us to tag release points. Any other arguments out there? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
Just a reminder, there still doesn't appear to be a 7.3.1 tag. This is from the HISTORY file. symbolic names: REL7_3_STABLE: 1.182.0.2 REL7_2_3: 1.153.2.8 REL7_2_STABLE: 1.153.0.2 REL7_2: 1.153 Notice 7.3 stable but nothing about 7.3.x! I also see a 7.2.3, etc., just as one would expect but nothing about 7.3 dot releases. I'm still getting, cvs [server aborted]: no such tag REL7_3_1_STABLE. Something overlooked here? Regards, Greg Copeland On Mon, 2002-12-23 at 09:57, Bruce Momjian wrote: Greg Copeland wrote: On Sun, 2002-12-22 at 13:12, Marc G. Fournier wrote: Last night, we packaged up v7.3.1 of PostgreSQL, our latest stable release. Purely meant to be a bug fix release, this one does have one major change, in that the major number of the libpq library was increased, which means that everyone is encouraged to recompile their clients along with this upgrade. This release can be found on all the mirrors, and on the root ftp server, under: ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/source/v7.3.1 Please report all bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hmm. For some reason I'm not seeing a 7.3.1 tag in CVS. Do you guys do something else for sub-releases? Case in point: cvs [server aborted]: no such tag REL7_3_1_STABLE It's still early here so I may be suffering from early morning brain rot. ;) There should be a 7.3.1 tag, but you can use the 7_3 branch to pull 7.3.1. Of course, that will shift as we patch for 7.3.2. -- Greg Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] Copeland Computer Consulting ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] v7.3.1 Bundled and Released ...
Greg Copeland wrote: On Sun, 2002-12-22 at 13:12, Marc G. Fournier wrote: Last night, we packaged up v7.3.1 of PostgreSQL, our latest stable release. Purely meant to be a bug fix release, this one does have one major change, in that the major number of the libpq library was increased, which means that everyone is encouraged to recompile their clients along with this upgrade. This release can be found on all the mirrors, and on the root ftp server, under: ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/source/v7.3.1 Please report all bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hmm. For some reason I'm not seeing a 7.3.1 tag in CVS. Do you guys do something else for sub-releases? Case in point: cvs [server aborted]: no such tag REL7_3_1_STABLE It's still early here so I may be suffering from early morning brain rot. ;) There should be a 7.3.1 tag, but you can use the 7_3 branch to pull 7.3.1. Of course, that will shift as we patch for 7.3.2. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
