Re: [HACKERS] Function-manager redesign: second draft (long)

wieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) writes:
> There is a new aspect in this discussion since then. The new
> corporation PostgreSQL Inc. offers commercial support for our
> database (look at www.pgsql.com). If they offer support, they
> must support older releases as well, so they need to
> backpatch already.

Yes, but who's the "them" here? If PostgreSQL Inc. has any warm
bodies other than the existing group of developers, I sure haven't
heard from them...

I agree 100% with Jan's basic point: we must provide a degree of
backwards compatibility from release to release. In some cases
that might create enough pain to be worth debating, but in this
particular case it seems like the choice is a no-brainer. We just
leave in the transition fmgr code that we're going to write anyway.
I don't understand why it even got to be a topic of discussion.

regards, tom lane