I just want to go on record stating that I don't think we need a 6.4.3
release because I am concerned about making a more buggy release than
6.4.2 because of inadequate testing and 6.5 retrofitting problems.

I also don't like to see effort expended on it rather than 6.5. 
However, I realize many people disagree with me.

I am ready to package up the 6.4.3 file changes needed when requested.

-- 
  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

Sun, 7 Mar 1999 13:53:54 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
6.4.3 release
On Sun, 7 Mar 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> I just want to go on record stating that I don't think we need a 6.4.3
> release because I am concerned about making a more buggy release than
> 6.4.2 because of inadequate testing and 6.5 retrofitting problems.

I would like to roll out a v6.4.3 the day we make v6.5 beta, myself ...
since only bug fixes were supposed to go into the v6.4.3 source tree, and
everyone would obviously have followed that simple rule to the letter,
there shouldn't be any more bugs in v6.4.3 then v6.4.2...right? :)

Marc G. Fournier                                
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Sun, 7 Mar 1999 19:07:48 -0400 (AST)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] 6.4.3 release
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> I would like to roll out a v6.4.3 the day we make v6.5 beta, myself ...
> since only bug fixes were supposed to go into the v6.4.3 source tree, and
> everyone would obviously have followed that simple rule to the letter,
> there shouldn't be any more bugs in v6.4.3 then v6.4.2...right? :)

Of course, the fact that the REL6_4 tree has been broken more than once
says that we've been sloppy :-(.

I'd suggest trying to get 6.4.3 out the door a week or so before 6.5
goes beta --- that way, if anything is badly broken, we have time to
deal with a 6.4.4 before the 6.5 beta cycle starts consuming all the
attention.

What is the current plan for 6.5 beta anyway?  Last I heard was
1 Feb, which we definitely have not met...

			regards, tom lane

Mon, 08 Mar 1999 02:18:34 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] 6.4.3 release 
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Tom Lane wrote:

> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > I would like to roll out a v6.4.3 the day we make v6.5 beta, myself ...
> > since only bug fixes were supposed to go into the v6.4.3 source tree, and
> > everyone would obviously have followed that simple rule to the letter,
> > there shouldn't be any more bugs in v6.4.3 then v6.4.2...right? :)
> 
> Of course, the fact that the REL6_4 tree has been broken more than once
> says that we've been sloppy :-(.
> 
> I'd suggest trying to get 6.4.3 out the door a week or so before 6.5
> goes beta --- that way, if anything is badly broken, we have time to
> deal with a 6.4.4 before the 6.5 beta cycle starts consuming all the
> attention.
> 
> What is the current plan for 6.5 beta anyway?  Last I heard was
> 1 Feb, which we definitely have not met...

We are awaiting stuff from Vadim, I believe concerning some code
completions he wants to do on the MVCC stuff...

Marc G. Fournier                                
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Mon, 8 Mar 1999 08:51:07 -0400 (AST)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] 6.4.3 release 
> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > I would like to roll out a v6.4.3 the day we make v6.5 beta, myself ...
> > since only bug fixes were supposed to go into the v6.4.3 source tree, and
> > everyone would obviously have followed that simple rule to the letter,
> > there shouldn't be any more bugs in v6.4.3 then v6.4.2...right? :)
> 
> Of course, the fact that the REL6_4 tree has been broken more than once
> says that we've been sloppy :-(.
> 
> I'd suggest trying to get 6.4.3 out the door a week or so before 6.5
> goes beta --- that way, if anything is badly broken, we have time to
> deal with a 6.4.4 before the 6.5 beta cycle starts consuming all the
> attention.
> 
> What is the current plan for 6.5 beta anyway?  Last I heard was
> 1 Feb, which we definitely have not met...

We did not specify a year.  :-)

-- 
  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

Mon, 8 Mar 1999 08:10:20 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] 6.4.3 release
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > > I would like to roll out a v6.4.3 the day we make v6.5 beta, myself ...
> > > since only bug fixes were supposed to go into the v6.4.3 source tree, and
> > > everyone would obviously have followed that simple rule to the letter,
> > > there shouldn't be any more bugs in v6.4.3 then v6.4.2...right? :)
> > 
> > Of course, the fact that the REL6_4 tree has been broken more than once
> > says that we've been sloppy :-(.
> > 
> > I'd suggest trying to get 6.4.3 out the door a week or so before 6.5
> > goes beta --- that way, if anything is badly broken, we have time to
> > deal with a 6.4.4 before the 6.5 beta cycle starts consuming all the
> > attention.
> > 
> > What is the current plan for 6.5 beta anyway?  Last I heard was
> > 1 Feb, which we definitely have not met...
> 
> We did not specify a year.  :-)

Damn, the loopholes that I keep leaving you guys *slap forehead* *grin*

Marc G. Fournier                                
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Mon, 8 Mar 1999 09:45:47 -0400 (AST)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] 6.4.3 release
> > > > I would like to roll out a v6.4.3 the day we make v6.5 beta, 
> > > > myself ... since only bug fixes were supposed to go into the 
> > > > v6.4.3 source tree, and everyone would obviously have followed 
> > > > that simple rule to the letter, there shouldn't be any more bugs 
> > > > in v6.4.3 then v6.4.2...right? :)

Nope. We had a *firm* declaration that the v6.4.x tree was dead. That
usually means done, finished, kaput. I stopped committing changes to
that tree, but instead posted patches in /pub/patches/ as I would think
the unwritten procedure would call for.

A long time later we then declared that there *would* be a v6.4.3, and I
was forced to try retrofitting the patches onto the dead source tree. I
don't know what other problems other people introduced, but it is a bit
of work to raise the dead, and I'll agree with Bruce that it is a
distraction.

However, we also have the feeling that v6.5 is a bit riskier than
previous recent versions, so want to continue the v6.4.x thread. I would
suggest that those who feel that way adopt the v6.4.x tree and ensure
that it is a solid release. Asking everyone to devote the same attention
to both v6.4.3 and to v6.5 will lead to gaps in test coverage which we
should avoid.

Or, perhaps we should declare a v6.4.3 beta period in which we do some
focused testing, then pick up v6.5 afterwards.

> > > Of course, the fact that the REL6_4 tree has been broken more than 
> > > once says that we've been sloppy :-(.

Sloppy? See above...

                    - Tom

Tue, 09 Mar 1999 03:05:11 +0000
"Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Re: [HACKERS] 6.4.3 release