public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: David Fetter <[email protected]>
To: Robert Treat <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Upcoming PG re-releases
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:36:52 -0800
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 01:23:38PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 November 2005 11:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Personally I expect to keep supporting 7.3 for a long while,
> > because Red Hat pays me to ;-) ... and the EOL date for RHEL3 is a
> > long way away yet. The PG community may stop bothering with 7.3
> > releases before that. But I think Marc and Bruce figure "as long
> > as the patches are in our CVS we may as well put out a release".
>
> Yeah, thats one of the reasons I am skeptical about having official
> policies on this type of thing.
I see this as an excellent reason to draw a bright, sharp line between
what vendors support and what the community as a whole does,
especially where individual community members wear another hat.
> If Sun decided they wanted to maintain 7.2 and were going to
> dedicate developers and testing for it, would we really turn that
> away?
If any company chooses to support versions that the community is no
longer supporting, that can be part of their value-add or more
properly, their headache. Making commitments on behalf of the
community--which will be held responsible for them no matter what
happens--based on what some company says it's going to do this week is
*extremely* ill-advised.
> OK, I don't really want to have this discussion again, but as of now
> I think we are all agreed that 7.2 is unsupported.
And it's good that we're making more definite moves to show that we no
longer support it :)
> > We hashed all this out in the pghackers list back in August, but I agree
> > there ought to be something about it on the website.
> >
>
> We've been kicking it around but haven't moved much on this...
>
> Marc, can you move the 7.2 branches in the FTP under the OLD directory?
> http://www.postgresql.org/ftp/source/
>
> We need to do the same with 7.2 documentation, moving them into the Manual
> Archive http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/archive.html. We can also
> change the caption on the main documentation page to note these are manuals
> for the current supported versions.
Excellent :)
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter [email protected] http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
view thread (55+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Upcoming PG re-releases
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox