On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:26:53 -0400, you wrote: >On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim ><fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:13:42 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: >>> No, I'm not advocating PgSQL 9 for F14, however, it shouldn't be so >>> far-fetched that Fedora could have any software at any time. >> >> A Fedora update policy is being hashed out, and even before that, the >> consensus is really against introducing major updates in stable releases. >> It's not really "anything goes" as your statement seems to imply. > >A parallel update is a major update requiring a 6 month wait in Fedora now? I would guess that the PostgreSQL maintainer(s) would prefer to only maintain one version in Fedora at a time. Really though, if people wanted PostgreSQL 9 in Fedora 14 they should have started asking about it or working on it months ago, getting it into Rawhide before the Fedora 14 split. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
