<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.timestamp
{mso-style-name:timestamp;}
span.hyperlink-whois
{mso-style-name:hyperlink-whois;}
span.hyperlink-channel
{mso-style-name:hyperlink-channel;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Are we ready for a PostGIS 3.0 beta 1release?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Any more features we plan to put in 3.0 before we nail the box?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I’d like to package a PostGIS 3.0 beta 1 to go with the PostgreSQL 12 beta 1 as I see PostgreSQL 12 now shipping with PostGIS 2.5.2 <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>which is discouraging given the effort we’ve put in to take advantage of PostgreSQL 12 features with 3.0.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>relevant thread on IRC:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:42] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>Myon</span>> trying postgis on PG12beta1: <a href="https://pgdgbuild.dus.dg-i.net/job/postgis-binaries-beta/architecture=amd64,distribution=sid/35/console" target="_blank">https://pgdgbuild.dus.dg-i.net/job/postgis-binaries-beta/architecture=amd64,distribution=sid/35/console</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:42] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>sigq</span>> Title: postgis-binaries-beta » amd64,sid <span class=hyperlink-channel>#35</span> Console [Jenkins] (at pgdgbuild.dus.dg-i.net)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:42] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>Myon</span>> is that a PostGIS problem, or one in PostgreSQL? (timestamp 17:39:21)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:43] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>robe2</span>> Myon you should be using PostGIS 3.0 for 12<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:43] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>Myon</span>> well that doesn't exist yet<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'> [11:43] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>robe2</span>> Myon if we shipped a beta would that help?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'> [11:43] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>robe2</span>> We are planning to release PostGIS 3.0 around same time as 12<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:44] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>robe2</span>> because it has a lot of stuff just for 12 :)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:44] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>Myon</span>> a beta would help sortish, because I wouldn't want to ship to users before it's stable, while still trying to support PG12<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:45] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>Myon</span>> it's just these extra "WARNING: stats for "t.g" do not exist" lines, the rest of the tests works<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:45] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>Myon</span>> does it make sense that these are duplicated now, or is that something that should be fixed in PostgreSQL itself? (I haven't yet read any postgis code)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=timestamp><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:45] </span></span><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><<span class=hyperlink-whois>robe2</span>> Okay let me bring it up for discussion on postgis dev<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'> </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><robe2> we aren't testing PostgreSQL 12 on 2.5 -- so it may not work completely until release time as we won't be in a rush to fix issues on 12 in 2.5 until release<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:46] <robe2> and the most we'd promise is it compiles -- not necessarily it regresses<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'> [11:48] <Algunenano> About the duplicated messages, I think that the issue had to do with CTEs and robe2 fixed it in 3.0 and refushed (:D) to fixed it in 2.5<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>[11:50] <robe2> :D) yap I refused we didn't put in all this effort in 3.0 for 12 just to have people shipping 2.5 with 12<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>If we aren’t ready maybe we should just wait till PG 13 comes out and forgo the 3.0 release in September. As there is no point in shipping a 3.0 mid cycle after PostgreSQL 12 is released and if packagers are going to ship a 2.5. Everyone will be settled in on a 2.5 and won’t waste their time upgrading to a 3.0 even if packagers were willing to ship a 3.0 with 12, which most WILL NOT.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Regina<o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>