Re: minimum Meson version

Hi,

On 2025-06-18 12:27:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 9:35 AM Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> wrote:
> >> And what I just don't understand about this whole discussion:
>
> > What I just don't understand about this discussion is a bunch of smart
> > people thinking that a bunch of other smart people have completely
> > lost their minds, while the second group thinks exactly the same about
> > the first group. There's hardly a topic to be found that produces more
> > apparent acrimony around here than what releases of things we ought to
> > still be supporting.
>
> Indeed. I think the compromise we've usually settled on is "we'll
> support release X as long as there's somebody willing to do the work".
> If it's not costing you personally any effort, why object to someone
> else wanting to spend effort on such things?

I don't think that's what we settled on *at all*, we rather settled on the
polar opposite.

Anyone that does work that is affected by support for old operating systems
has to either spend tremenduous energy arguing that we should remove support
for $old_os or spend tremenduous energy inventing workaround for $old_os.

I.e. folks demanding continued support for old operating systems do very
little work, whereas the folks that actually are affected a lot of time. It's
*tremendously* demotivating.

For some recent examples take this thread or the discussion about removing
support for old openssl versions. How can either of those be described as
folks wanting to support old operating systems doing work?

Greetings,

Andres Freund