Received: from localhost (maia-4.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 071AA9FB578 for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 05:15:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 62556-07 for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 05:15:53 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from developer.pgadmin.org (developer.pgadmin.org [63.246.23.140]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AE769FB548 for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 05:15:53 -0300 (ADT) Received: from snake.local ([62.232.55.118]) (authenticated bits=0) by developer.pgadmin.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l3U8Bvdc024600 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 30 Apr 2007 08:11:59 GMT Message-ID: <4635A5AE.7060409@postgresql.org> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 09:15:42 +0100 From: Dave Page User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Macintosh/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Kaltenbrunner CC: Heikki Linnakangas , Simon Riggs , Bruce Momjian , PostgreSQL-development Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report References: <200704270313.l3R3DwF16449@momjian.us> <1177792836.3663.61.camel@silverbirch.site> <46349EF4.2010304@enterprisedb.com> <4634EC25.6010104@postgresql.org> <4634F25C.3070403@kaltenbrunner.cc> <4634FCFF.5040806@postgresql.org> <46358620.5080808@kaltenbrunner.cc> <46359E41.3030409@postgresql.org> <4635A3D8.5050108@kaltenbrunner.cc> In-Reply-To: <4635A3D8.5050108@kaltenbrunner.cc> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 OpenPGP: url=http://www.pgadmin.org/pgp/davepage.pgp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200704/1228 X-Sequence-Number: 102561 Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: >> No, but it's exactly the reason why we release with/just before >> PostgreSQL. If we were offset by six months, we might find ourselves >> having to do compatibility releases mid-cycle for the latest PostgreSQL >> release. A change in pg_database such as we had previously wouldn't be >> an issue for the stable branch, but the changes to op classes etc. in >> 8.3 certainly would be of great concern. > > hmm - understood. I guess I simply speculated that doing a pgadmin > release might be much more lightweight than doing a PostgreSQL release Oh, it is - but then the work is done mainly by me, with Guillaume handling the translations and other people producing some of the binary builds. We don't have anything like to pool of developers that PostgreSQL does. > (how many "backbranches" is pgadmin supporting?". I think I now > understand why you are doing it that way though ... We don't support any back branches because each version of pgAdmin III supports PostgreSQL >= 7.3. When a new major release comes out, we drop support for the previous. We do have the advantage of not having to worry about on-disk upgrading data formats :-) Regards,Dave