> > 2) maintain a running list of porting problems. I've seen patches
> > submitted, and some patches applied, but *no* complete reports of "OK,
> > it works now" afterwards (I may be overstating this a bit, but you get
> > my point ;). But that contributes to...
> 
> Practically all of the currently-outstanding reports have to do with
> updating regress test expected results.  I made some progress on that
> last night but there are more to do.  Our standards seem to be higher
> now than they used to be --- people are expecting all the tests to
> pass with no noise.  So far, I don't think that anyone has reported
> regress test failures that actually suggest a porting problem.
> 
> We do have a major problem with portability of plperl.  I have yet
> to build a working version of it at all; in fact I haven't heard
> confirmation that it works from *anyone* other than the author.
> Has anyone else tried to use it?

Yes, I am inclined to disable the build for 7.0 final unless it works.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman@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

Thu, 30 Mar 2000 18:45:23 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: Release schedule (was Re: Improvement in SET commandsyntax)