On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:46:07AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > [...] we've repeatedly not bothered > to back-port regression test fixes for newer Pythons into that branch. > I could just omit Python 3 coverage for that branch in the critter's > configuration, but I wonder exactly why things are that way. > > For clarity, to cover 9.1 I think we'd need to back-patch some subset > of these commits: > > f16d52269 ff2faeec5 d0765d50f 6bff0e7d9 527ea6684 8182ffde5 > 45d1f1e02 2cfb1c6f7 > > The precedent of not fixing 9.1 started with the last of these.
> Or we could just blow it off on the grounds that 9.1 is not long > for this world anyhow. > > Opinions anyone? I respect the 2012-era decision to have 9.1 not support newer Python, and I think the lack of user complaints validates it. I wouldn't object to overturning the decision, either. The biggest risk, albeit still a small risk, is that newer Python is incompatible with 9.1 in a way that the test suite does not catch. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers