Re: [HACKERS] Do we want a CVS branch now?
Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bruce Momjian writes: I don't think we want a branch for 7.4 yet. We still have lots of open issues and the branch will require double-patching. Merge the changes on the 7.3 branch into the 7.4 branch after 7.3 is released. Why is that better than the other direction? We can't afford to allow much divergence between the two branches so long as we are engaged in wholesale double-patching, so I think it really comes down to the same thing in the end: we are not ready for 7.4 development to start in earnest, whether there's a CVS branch for it or not. Yes. We need a decision now because I don't know which branch to touch. Marc, I need your feedback on these ideas. There is discussion about fixing earthdistance. Perhaps we fix that and remove the 7.3 tag and just have everyone CVS checkout again. -- 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 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [HACKERS] Do we want a CVS branch now?
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bruce Momjian writes: I don't think we want a branch for 7.4 yet. We still have lots of open issues and the branch will require double-patching. Merge the changes on the 7.3 branch into the 7.4 branch after 7.3 is released. Why is that better than the other direction? We can't afford to allow much divergence between the two branches so long as we are engaged in wholesale double-patching, so I think it really comes down to the same thing in the end: we are not ready for 7.4 development to start in earnest, whether there's a CVS branch for it or not. Yes. We need a decision now because I don't know which branch to touch. Marc, I need your feedback on these ideas. There is discussion about fixing earthdistance. Perhaps we fix that and remove the 7.3 tag and just have everyone CVS checkout again. Go with Peter's suggestion about committing on one of the branches (v7.3 or v7.4, doesn't matter, unless Peter knows something I don't insofar as merging from branch-trunk vs trunk-branch?) ... then when we are ready to start letting it all diverge, we can just re-sync the opposite branch and keep on with development ... ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [HACKERS] Do we want a CVS branch now?
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: Yes. We need a decision now because I don't know which branch to touch. Marc, I need your feedback on these ideas. There is discussion about fixing earthdistance. Perhaps we fix that and remove the 7.3 tag and just have everyone CVS checkout again. Go with Peter's suggestion about committing on one of the branches (v7.3 or v7.4, doesn't matter, Let's go with committing to HEAD then. It's just easier (don't need a branch-tagged checkout tree to work in). We'll sync up the REL7_3 branch when we're ready to put out beta3. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [HACKERS] Do we want a CVS branch now?
Tom Lane writes: Why is that better than the other direction? It isn't. Let's just keep committing to the head and merge it into 7.3 later. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [HACKERS] Do we want a CVS branch now?
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marc, I know we said branch after beta2 but I think we need another week or two before we can start using that branch effectively. Even if we started using it, like adding PITR, the code would drift so much that the double-patching would start to fail when applied. Another problem is that with all the open issues, we still really need to focus on 7.3, not on 7.4 development. I don't want to see massive patches like PITR or the Windows-port stuff coming in just yet, because we don't have the bandwidth to review them now. Can the branch be undone, or can we not use it and just apply a mega-patch later to make it match HEAD? AFAIK there's no convenient way to undo the branch creation. I concur with treating HEAD as the active 7.3 area for the next week or so and then doing a bulk merge into the REL7_3 branch, so as to avoid the labor of individual double-patches. Marc previously proposed releasing beta3 in about a week --- will that be a good time to open HEAD for 7.4 work, or will we need to delay still longer? (I'm not sure yet, myself.) regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] Do we want a CVS branch now?
Tom Lane wrote: snip Marc previously proposed releasing beta3 in about a week --- will that be a good time to open HEAD for 7.4 work, or will we need to delay still longer? (I'm not sure yet, myself.) Perhaps it's too early to be able to effectively say when a real+effective branch is likely to be really needed? Stuff still feels a bit too chaotic. Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly -- My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there. - Indira Gandhi ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [HACKERS] Do we want a CVS branch now?
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Bruce Momjian writes: I don't think we want a branch for 7.4 yet. We still have lots of open issues and the branch will require double-patching. Merge the changes on the 7.3 branch into the 7.4 branch after 7.3 is released. Yes, there is something to be said for this idea. We can single-patch into 7.3 and make one mega-patch to bring 7.4 up to 7.3. I think that will work _if_ 7.4 doesn't drift too much, and even then, I just need to spend some time manually doing it. However, there is the danger that 7.4 changes will not hit all the areas coming in from the 7.3 patch. -- 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 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] Do we want a CVS branch now?
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bruce Momjian writes: I don't think we want a branch for 7.4 yet. We still have lots of open issues and the branch will require double-patching. Merge the changes on the 7.3 branch into the 7.4 branch after 7.3 is released. Why is that better than the other direction? We can't afford to allow much divergence between the two branches so long as we are engaged in wholesale double-patching, so I think it really comes down to the same thing in the end: we are not ready for 7.4 development to start in earnest, whether there's a CVS branch for it or not. 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])
[HACKERS] Do we want a CVS branch now?
[ I am starting to change subject headings to make things easier for people.] I don't think we want a branch for 7.4 yet. We still have lots of open issues and the branch will require double-patching. Marc, I know we said branch after beta2 but I think we need another week or two before we can start using that branch effectively. Even if we started using it, like adding PITR, the code would drift so much that the double-patching would start to fail when applied. Can the branch be undone, or can we not use it and just apply a mega-patch later to make it match HEAD? --- Marc G. Fournier wrote: As was previously discussed (and now that I'm mostly back from the dead ... damn colds) I've just branched off REL7_3_STABLE ... all future beta's will be made based off of that branch, so that development may resume on the main branch ... So, for those doing commits or anoncvs, remember that the 'stable' branch requires you to use: -rREL7_3_STABLE while the development branch is 'as per normal' ... ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html -- 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 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
