Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.4\))
Subject: Re: Reports on obsolete Postgres versions
From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
In-Reply-To: <65f02a88.170a0220.805a4.01ff@mx.google.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 11:56:19 +0100
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
 Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
 PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D581A853-47E3-4948-95D2-3124E96844FC@yesql.se>
References: <Ze9rnSQ4jAOpvF7k@momjian.us>
 <20240311211204.GA1786481@nathanxps13> <Ze902XsAC85dizNP@momjian.us>
 <65f02a88.170a0220.805a4.01ff@mx.google.com>
To: Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/D581A853-47E3-4948-95D2-3124E96844FC%40yesql.se>
Precedence: bulk

>> but that is far down the page.  Do we need to improve this?

> I liked the statement from Laurenz a while ago on his blog
> (paraphrased): "Upgrading to the latest patch release does not require
> application testing or recertification". I am not sure we want to put
> that into the official page (or maybe tone down/qualify it a bit), but =
I
> think a lot of users stay on older minor versions because they dread
> their internal testing policies.

I think we need a more conservative language since a minor release might =
fix a
planner bug that someone's app relied on and their plans will be worse =
after
upgrading.  While rare, it can for sure happen so the official wording =
should
probably avoid such bold claims.

> The other thing that could maybe be made a bit better is the fantastic
> patch release schedule, which however is buried in the "developer
> roadmap". I can see how this was useful years ago, but I think this =
page
> should be moved to the end-user part of the website, and maybe (also)
> integrated into the support/versioning page?

Fair point.

--
Daniel Gustafsson