Re: Predicted lifespan of different PostgreSQL

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, me(at)oisinglynn(dot)com, Bill Moran <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Predicted lifespan of different PostgreSQL
Date: 2007-01-29 22:48:30
Message-ID: 200701292248.l0TMmUR29395@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > I am pretty amazed people are considering shortening the release cycle
> > for our most popular platform.
>
> Are you volunteering to back-port and test all the Windows fixes that
> never went into 8.0?
>
> I think we should either do that, or admit that we're not supporting
> 8.0.x on Windows. I favor the latter; I'm certainly unwilling to spend
> any of my own time on the former.

I am fine with abandoning Win32 8.0.X because we don't want to backport
(like we did with 7.2.X), but not because we don't want to build the
install binaries.

--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2007-01-29 22:49:40 Re: PostgreSQL 9.0
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-01-29 22:48:10 Re: Crazy Error