| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Devrim GUNDUZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: State of support for back PG branches |
| Date: | 2005-09-26 23:16:00 |
| Message-ID: | 43388130.6050006@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
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."
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2005-09-27 00:01:31 | Re: State of support for back PG branches |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-09-26 23:05:28 | Re: Database file compatability |