Releasing 7.4.3 ...

----- Original Message -----
From: <pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org>
Sent: June 08, 2004 2:27 PM

Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:03:22 -0300 (ADT)
From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Subject: Releasing 7.4.3 ...

Next Monday, we're going to put out a 7.4.3 release, incorporating all the
little patches that have been back-patched to date ... I just setup a cron
job that will build a nightly snapshot of 'stable', that is available on
the ftp server under /pub/stable_snapshot ...

If anyone has any patches they want to get into this, please submit them
before Friday if you can ...

I am waiting for Peter to apply translation updates to 7.4.x:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-05/msg00497.php

-s

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:

Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ...

README.CVS is not supposed to appear in the tarball --- whatever Bruce
thought he did to remove it is not working ...

regards, tom lane

Tom Lane wrote:

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:

Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ...

README.CVS is not supposed to appear in the tarball --- whatever Bruce
thought he did to remove it is not working ...

Removing README.CVS from the tarball is something Marc handles, as far
as I know. I just added it to CVS and never worked on having it removed
from the tarballs.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Marc G. Fournier wrote:

Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ...
specifically, Peter, can you check that I've built/included the right
documentation?

Try reading the list of supported platforms at the bottom of the INSTALL
file...

Bruce Momjian wrote:

Removing README.CVS from the tarball is something Marc handles, as
far as I know. I just added it to CVS and never worked on having it
removed from the tarballs.

I've added a rule to remove README.CVS when making a distribution. But
I seem to be missing any rules to build the plain-text documentation
files. What happened to those?

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:

Bruce Momjian wrote:

Removing README.CVS from the tarball is something Marc handles, as
far as I know. I just added it to CVS and never worked on having it
removed from the tarballs.

I've added a rule to remove README.CVS when making a distribution. But
I seem to be missing any rules to build the plain-text documentation
files. What happened to those?

You mean HISTORY and INSTALL? They are there in the tarball (or were
yesterday anyway), so the build rule exists someplace ...

regards, tom lane

On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Marc G. Fournier wrote:

Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ...
specifically, Peter, can you check that I've built/included the right
documentation?

Try reading the list of supported platforms at the bottom of the INSTALL
file...

k, and that is supposed to tell me what?

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

Marc G. Fournier wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Marc G. Fournier wrote:

Anyone else, please test the tar ball for any bug/nits ...
specifically, Peter, can you check that I've built/included the
right documentation?

Try reading the list of supported platforms at the bottom of the
INSTALL file...

k, and that is supposed to tell me what?

There is supposed to be a table there; I just see unaligned gargage.
The INSTALL file looks quite bad.

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:

The INSTALL file looks quite bad.

It's clearly been freshly generated. The formatting does seem worse
than in previous versions, but it's not so bad I'd want to hold up
the release to fix it.

My guess is that the "wrong" version of lynx is being used to build it.
I remember being dissatisfied with the output of developer.pg.org's
version of lynx back when we were making this file manually.
(The version I have here is 2.8.5rel.1 (04 Feb 2004) and it seems to
do fine.)

regards, tom lane

I wrote:

My guess is that the "wrong" version of lynx is being used to build it.
I remember being dissatisfied with the output of developer.pg.org's
version of lynx back when we were making this file manually.
(The version I have here is 2.8.5rel.1 (04 Feb 2004) and it seems to
do fine.)

Actually, having just tried it, 2.8.5rel.1 generates output that is
nearly indistinguishable from what's in this morning's snapshot.
In particular I do not get the ASCII-art decoration for the table of
supported platforms that I see in the 7.4.2 version of INSTALL.
It comes out exactly like what's in the snapshot.

I'm now wondering about changes in the SGML stylesheets used to generate
the .html file we then send to lynx. But I would definitely put this
in the category of "something to investigate and fix later".

regards, tom lane

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Tom Lane wrote:

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:

The INSTALL file looks quite bad.

It's clearly been freshly generated. The formatting does seem worse
than in previous versions, but it's not so bad I'd want to hold up
the release to fix it.

My guess is that the "wrong" version of lynx is being used to build it.
I remember being dissatisfied with the output of developer.pg.org's
version of lynx back when we were making this file manually.
(The version I have here is 2.8.5rel.1 (04 Feb 2004) and it seems to
do fine.)

svr1# lynx --version
Lynx Version 2.8.5rel.1 (04 Feb 2004)
libwww-FM 2.14, SSL-MM 1.4.1, OpenSSL 0.9.7d
Built on freebsd4.9 Feb 28 2004 22:01:12

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664