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

Re: [CORE] EOL for 7.4?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-core(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [CORE] EOL for 7.4?
Date: 2009-12-01 23:43:36
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> I still insist it's unrealistic to consider any of these, even 8.2, as
> anything but "best effort" at this point.

Agreed, and we should not pretend otherwise.

> Declaring 8.0 "end of life"
> today is implying that we haven't already been skipping fixing bugs in
> it that would have required major changes. People running 8.1 and 8.2
> should be given the truth that only really important bugs are going to
> cause any significant development for these versions.

The other side of the coin is that people running such old versions are
in it for stability --- they don't *want* bugs fixed, unless they're
bugs they've hit themselves.  Major fixes that would possibly
destabilize the code base would be exactly what's not wanted.  Every
time I get Red Hat to ship an update version, it's only after fighting
tooth and nail to do a "rebase" instead of cherry-picking just the fixes
for bugs that paying customers have specifically complained about.  The
fact that we're pretty conservative about what we back-patch is the only
reason I ever win any of those arguments.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg StarkDate: 2009-12-01 23:44:02
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Previous:From: Greg SmithDate: 2009-12-01 23:36:13
Subject: Re: [CORE] EOL for 7.4?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group