Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 029E9476199 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 12:36:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from lubitsch.akademie.de (ns.akademie.de [62.165.4.3]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6380547611B for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 12:36:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from [62.165.4.160] (helo=redgrave) by lubitsch.akademie.de with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 18Dpp0-0005AU-00; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 18:36:30 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Ian Barwick Organization: akademie.de To: David Wheeler Subject: Re: DBD::PostgreSQL Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 18:36:02 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 Cc: Tom Lane , Tim Bunce , dbi-dev@perl.org, pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org References: <8F8B367F-FB19-11D6-93B3-0003931A964A@wheeler.net> In-Reply-To: <8F8B367F-FB19-11D6-93B3-0003931A964A@wheeler.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <200211181836.02769.barwick@akademie.de> X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200211/72 X-Sequence-Number: 3320 On Monday 18 November 2002 18:17, David Wheeler wrote: > PostgreSQL gets better and better. Yay. However, although I might be > able to use compile-time macros to determine the PostgreSQL version, I > have to support a minimum version of PostsgreSQL in the driver. I was > thinking 7.0 -- maybe it's time to leave the 6.x series behind. > > Thoughts, DBD::Pg users? Existing versions of DBD::Pg aren't suddenly going to get broken ;-) The README for DBD::Pg 1.13 says 6.5 is the minimum required version, which I believe was the last major release before 7.0. So anyone using < 6.5 is out of the DBD::Pg upgrade cycle anyway. A README- note along the lines of "PostgreSQL 6.5.x users: you need DBD::Pg 1.13" should suffice. Ian Barwick barwick@gmx.net