It looks like it may be an idea now, as for some reason, some parts of
the 6.5.3 JDBC driver isn't in 6.5.3?

We had a similar problem with 6.5.2, so before 6.5.3 was released, I
checked CVS to make sure the changes were there, and they were. It's
just that I've seen several references recently (the most recent from
Assaf this morning) about the protocol version being 1.0. The 6.5.3
driver was the first version not to use 1.0! eek.

Peter

-- 
Peter Mount
Enterprise Support
Maidstone Borough Council
Any views stated are my own, and not those of Maidstone Borough Council.



-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman@candle.pha.pa.us]
Sent: Friday, December 10, 1999 5:45 AM
To: PostgreSQL-development
Subject: [HACKERS] 6.6 release


There have been some people who have said they want a 6.6 release with
beta to start on February 1.  They are Tom Lane, Thomas Lockhart, and
myself.  Jan and Peter Eisentraut have said they will be ready on that
date.

Seems foreign key ability would be enough to justify a 6.6.

Comments?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania
19026

************

Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:43:07 -0000
Peter Mount <petermount@it.maidstone.gov.uk>
RE: [HACKERS] 6.6 release
Peter Mount <petermount@it.maidstone.gov.uk> writes:
> It looks like it may be an idea now, as for some reason, some parts of
> the 6.5.3 JDBC driver isn't in 6.5.3?
> We had a similar problem with 6.5.2, so before 6.5.3 was released, I
> checked CVS to make sure the changes were there, and they were.

They may be in the tip, but are they in the REL6_5_PATCHES branch?

			regards, tom lane

Fri, 10 Dec 1999 03:11:04 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] 6.6 release 