Re: Remove support for Visual Studio 2013

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Remove support for Visual Studio 2013
Date: 2022-05-16 12:19:28
Message-ID: be7a1723-8a50-f9d3-0365-7f741e723fee@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2022-05-16 Mo 06:34, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 08:46:31PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> Looking at the published lifecycle info, 2017 is the oldest still in
>> 'mainstream' support[4], so it wouldn't be too crazy to drop VS 2015
>> too, just like those other projects. That said, it sounds like there
>> is no practical benefit to being more aggressive than you are
>> suggesting currently (as in, we wouldn't get to delete any more crufty
>> untestable dead code by dropping 2015, right?), so maybe that'd be
>> enough for now.
> FWIW, one of my environments is using VS2015, because I have set it up
> years ago and I am lazy to do this setup except if I really have to :)
>
> The code works as far as I know, still I am not really excited about
> cutting support for more versions than necessary, particularly as this
> does not simplify the C code more.

Yeah, I'm ok with this. The only older version I have is currawong, but
it runs on NT and so only builds release 10 and will probably be retired
around the end of the year.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com 2022-05-16 12:34:25 RE: bogus: logical replication rows/cols combinations
Previous Message Dilip Kumar 2022-05-16 10:57:28 Re: Make relfile tombstone files conditional on WAL level