Re: How to modify ENUM datatypes?

On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:27 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Maybe I'm some crazy, radical DBA, but I've never had a version of
> >> pgsql get EOLed out from underneath me.
>
> Just for fun, I did a bit of digging in the release notes
> http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/release.html
> and came up with this table about PG major releases and their
> follow-on bug fix/minor releases:
>
> Version Release date # updates Days till final update Days till next major
>
> 6.0 1997-01-29 0 0 130
> 6.1 1997-06-08 1 44 116
> 6.2 1997-10-02 1 15 150
> 6.3 1998-03-01 2 37 243
> 6.4 1998-10-30 2 51 222
> 6.5 1999-06-09 3 126 334
> 7.0 2000-05-08 3 187 340
> 7.1 2001-04-13 3 124 297
> 7.2 2002-02-04 8 1190 296
> 7.3 2002-11-27 21 1867 355
> 7.4 2003-11-17 19+ ? 429
> 8.0 2005-01-19 15+ ? 293
> 8.1 2005-11-08 11+ ? 392
> 8.2 2006-12-05 7+ ? 426
> 8.3 2008-02-04 1+ ? ?
>
> It's pretty clear that there was a sea-change around 7.2/7.3 ---
> before that, nobody thought that PG releases were anything that
> might be long-lived. And there's nothing in this table that
> suggests we've really settled on a new lifespan ... other than that
> we're still putting out new majors at a constant rate, and the community
> hasn't got the resources or interest to maintain an ever-increasing
> number of back branches.
>
> regards, tom lane

Not really Postgres's problem, but for whatever its worth if I do the
following on Debian stable:
$apt-get install postgresql

I get 7.4 . When I install Debian I generally expect the software to
be supported for a long time. Perhaps it might make sense to declare
it dead except for security issues?

--
Rob Wultsch
wultsch(at)gmail(dot)com
wultsch (aim)