Re: What about Perl autodie?

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: What about Perl autodie?
Date: 2024-02-10 16:05:41
Message-ID: 27a8f7cb-1378-855e-2c50-a57302625a83@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2024-02-08 Th 11:08, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 8 Feb 2024, at 16:53, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> 2. Don't wait, migrate them all now. This would mean requiring
>> Perl 5.10.1 or later to run the TAP tests, even in back branches.
>>
>> I think #2 might not be all that radical. We have nothing older
>> than 5.14.0 in the buildfarm, so we don't really have much grounds
>> for claiming that 5.8.3 will work today. And 5.10.1 came out in
>> 2009, so how likely is it that anyone cares anymore?
> I would vote for this option, if we don't run the trailing edge anywhere where
> breakage is visible to developers then it is like you say, far from guaranteed
> to work.
>

+1 from me too. We kept 5.8 going for a while because it was what the
Msys (v1) DTK perl was, but that doesn't matter any more I think.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2024-02-10 16:16:46 Re: Possibility to disable `ALTER SYSTEM`
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2024-02-10 13:10:06 Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby