* Josh Berkus (j...@berkus.org) wrote: > On 02/09/2017 12:53 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > Waiting 10+ years doesn't make the pain go away when it comes to > > removing things like that. > > Sure it does. That's two whole generations of client tools. For > example, at that point, pgAdmin3 won't reliably run on any supported > platform, so it won't be a problem if we break it.
That's not true if OpenSCG has their way as they're continuing to maintain it, from my understanding. And, I'm sorry, but counting on projects to essentially die off to be the point where we can drop certain bits of backwards-compatibility just isn't a winning strategy. > If we clearly mark the old function names as deprecated aliases, client > tools will gradually move to the new names. No, they won't. They haven't. Look at pg_shadow- it was clearly marked as deprecated in *8.1*. > Counter-argument: moving the directory is going to break many tools > anyway, so why bother with function aliases? You're going to have to explain exactly the argument you're making there, because I don't see the point you're trying to get at with that question. Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature