Re: A deprecation policy

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A deprecation policy
Date: 2009-02-11 18:33:40
Message-ID: 12213.1234377220@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> I have been thinking, with a semi-formal deprecation policy, we could
> make these decisions with more confidence. My proposed policy goes like
> this:

I've been thinking about this for a couple of hours, and I keep coming
back to the conclusion that if we actually enforced a policy like this
it would kill Postgres development dead. It already takes more than a
year, on average, for a proposal to go from idea to out-in-the-field.
This policy would add another two years onto that for anything that
involved user-visible changes, which is most things. All but the most
persistent developers are simply going to go away and not bother trying
to shepherd their ideas through such a process.

I can see the value of a more formal deprecation policy, but I think
it's gotta have a shorter time constant than this.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-02-11 18:39:10 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update autovacuum to use reloptions instead of a system catalog,
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-02-11 18:18:11 Re: temporarily stop autovacuum