Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 21:03:59 -0500
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Devrim =?iso-8859-1?B?R/xuZPx6?= <devrim@gunduz.org>
Cc: pgsql-pkg-yum@postgresql.org
Subject: please build packages --with-lz4
Message-ID: <20210322020359.GF4203@telsasoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210322020359.GF4203%40telsasoft.com>
Precedence: bulk

Would you plan to build packages --with-lz4 ?

See commit bbe0a81db69bd10bd166907c3701492a29aca294
    Allow configurable LZ4 TOAST compression.

Also, a reminder about this old thread.
The devel packages should be built with a versions like (I think)
0.1.14.0-alpha*

postgresql14.x86_64                                                                               14-alpha_20210322_PGDG.rhel7                                                                               pgdg14-updates-testing

On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 11:56:01AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-05-23 at 09:55 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > I'm wondering how versioning on PGDG RPMs is intended to work.
> > > Yum seems to thinks that the "nightly builds" are of higher version number
> > > than beta.
> > > [pryzbyj@dev ~]$ yum list --enablerepo='pgdg12-updates-testing' --showdu postgresql12
> > > Installed Packages postgresql12.x86_64             12.0-1devel_20190502_1PGDG.rhel7                  @pgdg12-updates-testing
> > > Available Packages postgresql12.x86_64             12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7                               pgdg12-updates-testing 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 11:15:58AM +0100, Devrim Gündüz wrote:
> > Oops, I did it again :-( Let's review this once we start releasing 13 devel
> > RPMs after summer.
> 
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 12:24:29AM +0100, Devrim Gündüz wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-04-08 at 10:47 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > A reminder about this.
> > > The versions should sort like:
> > > 
> > > nightly build < beta < rc < released
> > 
> > Can you please send a patch?
> 
> I'm sorry, but I don't know anything about building RPMs.
> 
> When I mentioned last year, it looked like:
> > > postgresql12.x86_64             12.0-1devel_20190502_1PGDG.rhel7                  @pgdg12-updates-testing
> > > postgresql12.x86_64             12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7                               pgdg12-updates-testing 
> 
> That's an issue since "12" sorts lower than "12beta1", which means that the
> devel => beta upgrade didn't work correctly (I don't remember, but that maybe
> also broke the beta/rc => 13.0 release upgrade).
> 
> The curent package looks like:
> postgresql13.x86_64                 13.0-20200407_devel_1PGDG.rhel7   @pgdg13-updates-testing
> 
> I think that will be an issue again when you release beta1, unless you name it
> something weird like 20200601beta1.
> 
> I found:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/
> |Prerelease versions
> |In the Version: tag, use the version that upstream has determined the next release will be. For the field of the Release: tag, use a number of the form "0.N" where N is an integer beginning with 1 and increasing for each revision of the package. Prerelease versions MUST use a Release: tag strictly less than 1, as this is the sole indicator that a prerelease has been packaged.
> 
> So I *think* the devel release should be called something like this with a
> leading "0.0":
> 
> postgresql13-13.0.0.20200407git[...]
> 
> And then beta1 can use a leading "0.1" or (according to that doc) "~":
> postgresql13-13.0.1.beta1 
> postgresql13-13.0~beta1
> 
> "r" follows "b" so "rc" will work right using the same convention.
> postgresql13-13.0.1.rc1 
> postgresql13-13.0~rc1
> 
> And then I think it's finally released as:
> postgresql13-13.0 (here, the "release tag" is 1):
> 
> -- 
> Justin

-- 
Justin Pryzby
System Administrator
Telsasoft
+1-952-707-8581