Naming of postgresql & related

[Jyrki Wahlstedt]

Hi,
I have 8.0.10 portfiles ready. I assume it is ok to commit that as  
postgresql80?! Committing that as postgresql8 would be weird, because  
the version would change from 8.1.3 to 8.0.10 causing difficulties  
with binary format.

On 20.1.2007, at 16.35, Randall Wood wrote:

> I would not remove port:postgresql, but make it an informative port  
> that installs nothing, instead just spewing out an explanation of  
> the other postgresql ports.
>
> I would also replace port:postgresql8 with a port:postgresql80 that  
> carries the 8.0.x postgresql
> and otherwise just keep the other postgresqlx ports current.
>
> On 20 Jan 2007, at 07:38, Jann Röder wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> this issue just came to my attention again: On the postgreSQl website
>> the following versions are available:
>> - 8.2.1
>> - 8.1.6
>> - 8.0.10
>> - 7.4.15
>>
>> In macports the following ports are available:
>>
>> postgresql                     databases/postgresql 7.4.12
>> postgresql7                    databases/postgresql7 7.4.13
>> postgresql8                    databases/postgresql8 8.1.3
>> postgresql81                   databases/postgresql81 8.1.5
>> postgresql82                   databases/postgresql82 8.2.1
>>
>> It seems to me that the posgresql8 port is installing the wrong  
>> version
>> - should be 8.0.10 instead of 8.1.3 , the posgresql port should be
>> removed, postgresql7 and psogresql81 are slightly out of date.
>>
>> So I think the postgresql port (with no version) should be  
>> deleted, and
>> the others should be updated.
>>
>> What do you think ?
>>
>> Jann
>>
>> Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>>> On Nov 4, 2006, at 6:39 AM, Jyrki Wahlstedt wrote:
>>>> I just wonder about naming postgresql, some other ports could  
>>>> have the
>>>> same. Currently postgresql installs v.7.4.12. Then we have  
>>>> postgresql7
>>>> (v.7.4.13), postgresql8 (v.8.1.3) and postgresql81 (v.8.1.4).  
>>>> This is
>>>> a mess. I think postgresql should always be the latest, then we  
>>>> could,
>>>> if we want, to have version-specific ports (~7, ~8, ~81). How  
>>>> about this?
>>>
>>> This was changed because people do 'port upgrade' and wanted  
>>> things to
>>> work. And because of your point below, the easiest thing is to  
>>> just have
>>> version-specific ports (and let the user handle the file format
>>> incompatible upgrades themselves).
>>>
>>> I believe the 'postgresql' port was deprecated when the decision was
>>> made and that it was intended for it to be removed (but I could  
>>> remember
>>> incorrectly).
>>>
>>>> The related thing comes from the fact that the database formats
>>>> between point versions of postgresql are not compatible (8.0- 
>>>> >8.1). Is
>>>> there a way to make sure that database is dumped before upgrade.
>>>
>>> That is probably possible, but I don't know if it makes sense to  
>>> attempt
>>> this (for instance, I have a database that would take days to  
>>> dump that
>>> contains data that I'm happy to toss when I want to do an  
>>> upgrade, but
>>> the upgrade step can't know that).
>>>
>>> Also, 'upgrade' isn't really a normal target, so it would be a  
>>> hack in
>>> the portfile to attempt to do this.
>>>
>>>> Could one ask a question from the user and wait for an answer (to
>>>> confirm the operation)?
>>>
>>> No. Ports don't prompt for things - this would break unattended
>>> (scripted) operation.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Daniel J. Luke
>>> +========================================================+
>>> | *---------------- dluke at geeklair.net
>>> ----------------* |
>>> | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* |
>>> +========================================================+
>>> |   Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily   |
>>> |          reflect the opinions of my employer.          |
>>> +========================================================+
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> Randall Wood
> rhwood at mac.com
>
> "The rules are simple: The ball is round. The game lasts 90  
> minutes. All the
> rest is just philosophy."
>
!
! Jyrki Wahlstedt
!	skype:jyrkiwahlstedt
!	http://www.wahlstedt.fi/jyrki/
!
! Our life is no dream; but it ought to become one and perhaps will.
! PGP key ID: 0x139CC386 fingerprint: F355 B46F 026C B8C1 89C0  A780  
6366 EFD9 139C C386