On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:36 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Maybe we could compromise on > > If the expected PG major version release date is more than N years > after the end of full support for an LTS distribution, that OS > version does not need to be supported. > > Defining it relative to "full support" also reduces questions about > whether extended support means the same thing to every LTS vendor. > > If we set N=2 then we could drop RHEL8 support in PG 19; if we > set N=3 then it'd be PG 20 (measuring from end of full support > in May 2024). I'd be okay with either outcome.
I see that RHEL8 support is ending [1], hooray! Are we comfortable applying the "N=2" rule to all of our LTS targets? And is this thread the de facto policy going forward? --Jacob [1] https://yum.postgresql.org/news/news-rhel8-end-of-life/
