Re: Antonio Terceiro 2017-03-27 <20170327152137.23l7vyrunt5pm...@debian.org> > We do exactly that in Ruby, and it is manageable. When the set of > supported versions change, we update the list in a central place > (ruby-defaults), and binNMU/fix existing modules. We also make the > dependencies in such a way that a package that contains modules for more > than one version depends on the stuff from _one_ of the versions, but > not from all of them. > > Each context (Debian, apt.postgresql.org) could have a different set of > supported versions via something similar to dpkg-vendor. > > Are you opposed to this in principle? Or, would you be willing to > support this if the necessary patches are written? (not saying I will do > that, or at least not in the short term :-))
If we have a written plan that addresses the concerns, we should go for it. > > Also this would make it impossible to provide modules packages for the > > upcoming PostgreSQL 10 version, because "postgresql-debversion.deb" is > > already in use there. > > Does this mean that for PostgreSQL 10+ the module packages will have no > version numbers in their names? Or is that just something you reserve > for the very latest version at the time? It means we can't ship postgresql-debversion.deb containing 9.2..9.6 and postgresql-debversion.deb containing 10 in the same repository. Christoph
