From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions |
Date: | 2021-12-07 17:46:09 |
Message-ID: | 3502465.1638899169@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I guess the point about user-visible bug fixes is that, as soon as we
> start doing that, we don't really want it to be hit-or-miss. We could
> make a decision to back-patch all bug fixes or those of a certain
> severity or whatever we like back to older branches, and then those
> branches would be supported or semi-supported depending on what rule
> we adopted, and we could even continue to do releases for them if we
> so chose. However, it wouldn't be a great idea to back-patch a
> completely arbitrary subset of our fixes into those branches, because
> then it sort of gets confusing to understand what the status of that
> branch is.
Yup, and also confusing to understand whether a given new fix should
be back-patched into the out-of-support-but-keep-buildable branches.
I want to settle on a reasonably well-defined policy for that.
I'm basically suggesting that the policy should be "back-patch the
minimal fix needed so that you can still get a clean build and clean
check-world run, using thus-and-such configure options". (The point
of the configure options limitation being to exclude moving-target
external dependencies, such as Python.) I think that Peter's
original suggestion could be read the same way except for the
adjective "clean". He also said that only core regression needs
to pass not check-world; but if we're trying to test things like
pg_dump compatibility, I think we want the wider scope of what to
keep working.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2021-12-07 17:49:57 | Re: Alter all tables in schema owner fix |
Previous Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2021-12-07 17:34:46 | Re: Pre-allocating WAL files |