On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Josh Berkus wrote:
Tom,
Or, as you say, we could take the viewpoint that there are commercial
companies willing to take on the burden of supporting back releases, and
the development community ought not spend its limited resources on doing
that. I'm hesitant to push that idea very hard myself, because it would
look too much like I'm pushing the interests of my employer Red Hat
... but certainly there's a reasonable case to be made there.
Well, I think you know my opinion on this. Since there *are* commercial
companies available, I think we should use them to reduce back-patching
effort. I suggest that our policy should be: the community will patch two
old releases, and beyond that if it's convenient, but no promises. In other
words, when 8.1 comes out we'd be telling 7.3 users "We'll be patching this
only where we can apply 7.4 patches. Otherwise, better get a support
contract."
Of course, a lot of this is up to individual initiative; if someone fixes a
patch so it applies back to 7.2, there's no reason not to make it available.
However, there's no reason *you* should make it a priority.
Agreed ... "if its convient/easy to back patch, cool ... but don't go out
of your way to do it" ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
