Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > One thing to consider: I can't imagine backporting this to all supported > back branches, it'd be a switch for the next release. Right?
Agreed. > That means he doesn't have to worry about what RH / Debian policy for their > old versions is. RH isn't going to release PostgreSQL 9.7 or whatever for > RHEL6, Debian isn't going to release it for Wheezy, etc. Well, they won't if we make it impossible for them to do so. More generally, I do not buy this argument for one second as a reason why we can demand latest-and-greatest cmake, rather than something that's likely to be readily available on a wide variety of platforms. Devrim is not the only person in the world who will be needing to build PG on RHEL6, or even older platforms. If you take a close look at our build requirements, you will notice a general distaste for insisting on latest anything. cmake is not going to escape that project bias. Do you really think a project that still works with C89, Perl 5.8.something, Python 2.3, bison 1.875, yadda yadda is readily going to accept a patch that requires this year's cmake? It would take a fairly impressive technical argument why working with older cmakes is impossible/impractical before that will happen. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers