[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#755096: marked as done (transition: postgresql-9.4)

Your message dated Fri, 05 Sep 2014 22:26:11 +0200
with message-id <540A1C63.3050200@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#755096: transition: postgresql-9.4
has caused the Debian Bug report #755096,
regarding transition: postgresql-9.4
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
755096: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=755096
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

Hi,

we currently have PostgreSQL 9.3 in unstable/testing. PostgreSQL 9.4.0
will be releasing around September. 9.4~beta1 is already in
experimental, and 9.4~beta2 will release next Thursday.

Our plan is to upload this beta2 of postgresql-9.4 to unstable, and
set the 9.4 as the only supported PostgreSQL version as per
/usr/share/postgresql-common/supported-versions. postgresql-9.3 will
stay in unstable (and testing) until all dependencies have been moved
to 9.4. This is mostly just recompiling the extension module packages;
most will adjust to the new version automatically.

I've tested most of the "interesting" packages, most of them do not
have any issues with 9.4. For a handful, fixes have already been made
upstream, pending new releases, and some need some trivial debian/
updating. All in all, atm there is only one package (pg-reorg) which I
know isn't 9.4-ready, and that's probably just a matter of pinging
upstream (TBD).

As with the other PostgreSQL server packages, we will provide new
minor versions as upstream releases them, so jessie should be
releasing with something like 9.4.2, which sounds like a nice target.

I believe this transition should only require little (if any) release
team attention (no group of packages should need to enter testing in
parallel), though of course we'd like your opinion. Does this plan
look sane?

Ben file:

title = "postgresql-9.4";
is_affected = .depends ~ /postgresql.*-9.[34].*/;
is_good = .depends ~ /postgresql.*-9.4.*/;
is_bad = .depends ~ /postgresql.*-9.3.*/;

Christoph
-- 
cb@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 17/07/14 21:38, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
> 
> On 17/07/14 20:47, Christoph Berg wrote:
>> Re: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort 2014-07-17 <53C8174F.5070604@debian.org>
>>> Does all the stuff that says "todo" on the wiki need major work?
>>
>> That means there's a slight chance the package might get confused by
>> catalog changes in the new server, though there's been little change
>> in that area that should be of interest to client applications.
>>
>> I've tested the packages I expect to be most likely affected, the
>> remaining "todo" ones are mostly the ones I wouldn't expect to have
>> troubles. That said, I need to try more of the "lib" packages.
>>
>>> Do you think all/most of that can be switched to 9.4 by November?
>>
>> Yes. In fact I expect the "formal" part of the transition (the
>> packages that depend on 9.3) to be done until September. The rest is
>> testing libs like jdbc that read half of the system catalog on connect
>> will continue to work.
> 
> Sounds good! Since packages can migrate one by one as you explained, feel free
> to upload whenever you're ready.

postgresql-9.3 got removed from testing a while ago, so from our (RT) POV this
is done now. The few packages that had to be removed from jessie can be updated
and migrate again but there's no coordination needed for that, so I'm closing this.

Cheers,
Emilio

--- End Message ---
Reply to: