<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
+1 sounds good to me. We still have back to PostGIS 1.3 for download
on the website if people absolutely need to run old versions of
Postgres.<br>
<br>
Chris<br>
<br>
On 12-05-22 11:46 PM, Paragon Corporation wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:C927F8F8E30F44EA817670FF735A6DC5@D"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16443">
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">Now
that we are all entrenched in 2.1, I'd like to get this out
of the way so we don't have to waste time testing it
anymore.</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">I
propose we drop 8.4 support in 2.1 because:</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">1)
2.1 is going to have to support 9.0,9.1,9.2 (and yikes maybe
even 9.3)</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">2)
There are many changes in how plpgsql works between 8.4 and
the 9.0 that makes it difficult to cross</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">test
- for example how aliases are handled in 9.0 -- so code that
works in 8.4 may not work in 9.0</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">3)
lack of ordered by aggs in 8.4 which I feel might be
important later on for raster and topology</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">4)
improvements in window functionality in 9.0 missing in 8.4
(e.g. great improvements in RANGE and intro of numbered
ROWS)</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">which
again would be useful probably more so for topology
(possibly tiger geocoder) than any other piece of PostGIS.</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">5)
9.1 and 9.2 will support KNN GIST, 9.2 will support SP GIST
so we are already coding exceptions. I know we still have
to for 9.0</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">6)
PGXS - Mark's hack is needed for 8.4 but not for 9.0 etc. --
Mark can you confirm?</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">7)
I think in 2.2 we'll probably be forced to drop 9.0 and
dropping two versions in one release I think is too steep of
a slope for our users.</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">Thanks,</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial">Regina</font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"><font size="2" face="Arial"><a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.postgis.us">http://www.postgis.us</a></font></span></div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<div><span class="377543706-23052012"></span> </div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
postgis-devel mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net">postgis-devel@postgis.refractions.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel">http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>