| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: EOL for 7.4? |
| Date: | 2009-11-03 16:01:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20091103160114.GA3645@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane escribió:
> A quick look in the cvs history shows 5 commits to 7.4 since the last
> set of releases, 6 commits to 8.0, 8 to 8.1, 13 to 8.2, 18 to 8.3.
> A couple of these patches were Windows-specific and were made only back
> to 8.2 because we desupported Windows in older branches awhile back.
> So far as I can see, the others were all made as far back as applicable.
> I think the lack of churn in 7.4 just means it's gotten pretty darn
> stable.
If it's all that stable, what's the point in EOLing it? The only extra
pain it causes is having to check whether each patch needs to be
backpatched to it or not.
(Maybe this means we can announce today that we're going to EOL it in a
distant future, say in a year.)
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-03 16:13:49 | Re: A small bug in gram.y |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-03 16:01:09 | Re: backup_label in a crash recovery |