Re: State of support for back PG branches

On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

>
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> If we want to have some sort of fixed policy for support lifespan, I
>> would suggest it be like "X amount of time after the release of the
>> following major version". But X probably has to depend on how big
>> the compatibility gotchas are in the following version, so we're still
>> really talking about a judgment call here.
>>
>>
>>
>
> I'm not sure that that's going to help users much. I should think around
> 3 years (or some such predictable period) is a reasonable lifetime goal
> for a piece of software like this, accompanied by some weasel words.
> Maybe something like this would do: "We will attempt to maintain support
> of each major version for 3 years after its release, although this will
> not always be possible. After that time any major support requirement is
> likely to result in support being ended."

This sounds reasonable to me ... I think it is more then most software
projects do, isn't it?

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664