Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: State of support for back PG branches

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Devrim GUNDUZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: State of support for back PG branches
Date: 2005-09-27 00:01:31
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> Tom Lane wrote:
>> If we want to have some sort of fixed policy for support lifespan, I
>> would suggest it be like "X amount of time after the release of the
>> following major version".  But X probably has to depend on how big
>> the compatibility gotchas are in the following version, so we're still
>> really talking about a judgment call here.
> I'm not sure that that's going to help users much. I should think around 
> 3 years (or some such predictable period) is a reasonable lifetime goal 
> for a piece of software like this, accompanied by some weasel words. 
> Maybe something like this would do: "We will attempt to maintain support 
> of each major version for 3 years after its release, although this will 
> not always be possible. After that time any major support requirement is 
> likely to result in support being ended."

This sounds reasonable to me ... I think it is more then most software 
projects do, isn't it?

Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg Sabino MullaneDate: 2005-09-27 00:12:15
Subject: Re: Questions about proper newline handling in psql output
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2005-09-26 23:16:00
Subject: Re: State of support for back PG branches

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group