Dave Page wrote: > > > > ------- Original Message ------- > > From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx> > > To: Dave Page <dpage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: 29/01/07, 21:12:30 > > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Predicted lifespan of different PostgreSQLbranches > > > > I am pretty amazed people are considering shortening the release cycle > > for our most popular platform. As it is a packaging issue, if some > > people don't want to continue providing updates, I can start asking in > > the community for someone else to do it. > > > > If the port is broken, and people must upgrade, I can see the reason for > > not releasing updates, but if it is a question of time committment, I > > oppose such cutbacks. > > It's not a question of having the time - it's partly what I'm paid for > these days. It's a question of whether that time is being wasted > maintaining old versions that perhaps people aren't concerned with any > more. That's why I brought the subject up on this -general thread, > rather than in -hackers. > > A couple of thoughts spring to mind that might warrant some > consideration: > > - Windows is our most popular platform for sure, but I would wager the > majority of those installations are development/test installs and that > possibly Linux is the most popular platform for production systems. > Those dev systems are likely to be running the latest version. > > - So far I think you are the only person to object to 8.0 being dropped! > > In any case, if people want to keep 8.0, then I will keep building it > for the time being. We might need to start staggering point releases > though. I am fine to drop if the port isn't maintainable (like 7.2.X) , but it seems far too early to drop building it if the code is maintained like the other ports. If we drop 8.0.X, and release for other ports, I can assure you people will ask for that binary. We can always wait and see how many people ask. -- Bruce Momjian bruce@xxxxxxxxxx EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
