| From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Replace uses of deprecated Python module distutils.sysconfig |
| Date: | 2022-02-01 01:50:55 |
| Message-ID: | 20220201015055.GA2699515@rfd.leadboat.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:18:47PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> [ I was hoping for more opinions, but I guess nobody cares but us ]
>
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > On 2022-01-27 17:53:02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> So now we need to discuss whether we want to back-patch this.
> >> Pros: avoid configure warning now (not worth much); avoid outright
> >> build failure on Python 3.12+ in future.
> >> Cons: breaks compatibility with Python 2.6 and 3.1.
> If nobody else has weighed in by tomorrow, I'll backpatch to v10.
Works for me. I agree wanting Python 3.12 w/ PG10.latest is far more likely
than wanting Python 2.6 or 3.1. If someone lodges a non-academic complaint,
we could have back branches fallback to the old way if they detect a Python
version needing the old way. I doubt anyone will complain.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2022-02-01 02:31:36 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2022-02-01 01:44:35 | Re: Add checkpoint and redo LSN to LogCheckpointEnd log message |