Re: Predicted lifespan of different PostgreSQL branches

In response to Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>:
> On Jan 27, 2007, at 3:41 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> >> Does the PostgreSQL project have any similar policy about EoLs?
> >> Even just
> >> a simple statement like, "it is our goal to support major branches
> >> for 2
> >> years after release" or some such?
> >
> > I've been considering only maintaining the current and previous 2
> > versions in pgInstaller (the Windows binary distro). But that's a
> > *lot*
> > harder to maintain than just PostgreSQL because of all the bundled
> > stuff. In other words, when 8.3 is out, the 8.0 series gets dropped.
> >
> > What do people think about that? Does anyone think it would be an
> > unreasonable policy?
>
> FWIW, I looked in the archives at the last time we discussed this a
> while ago; the popular proposal seemed to be that at a *minimum* we'd
> support a version for 2 years *after* it was replaced. IE: 8.0
> support could end 2 years after 8.1 came out (which would be
> somewhere around this Dec., IIRC).
>
> But it's also important to point out that a number of community
> members are on the hook to support old versions due to their day
> jobs; with Tom/Red Hat/7.3 (or is it 7.4?) probably being the best
> example. IIRC Sun's support policy is 5 years, so presumably someone
> will have to maintain whatever version they initially shipped with
> (8.1?) for quite some time as well.

Right. and my original point in starting this thread is that it would
be valuable to the community if all this information were gathered up
and documented somewhere.

--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.