From: | Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Bill Moran <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Predicted lifespan of different PostgreSQL branches |
Date: | 2007-02-02 03:29:21 |
Message-ID: | 59A6ACFE-BF0B-461B-957B-F917F1D3EC4C@decibel.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
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.
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2007-02-02 03:31:26 | Re: VACUUM ANALYZE taking a long time, %I/O and %CPU very low |
Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2007-02-02 03:14:42 | Re: Converting 7.x to 8.x |