Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think these two justify declaring the Windows port at EOL prior to 
> 8.2. The others probably not so much. (Who cares if pg_regress is not a 
> C program? Who besides developers uses it?)

The reason to care about it is that the lack of it guarantees the port
will be poorly tested.

> I hope this will be a one-off exercise, though.

Certainly.  We knew going into it that the Windows port would have
teething pains, and so it did.  The 8.0 release was effectively a beta
as far as native Windows was concerned (and was stated to be such).
Dropping 8.1 is a bit more debatable ... but ultimately it comes down
to who is willing to do back-porting effort for Windows-specific bug
fixes, given that the code base has changed so much.  The core team have
agreed that *we* are not going to do that.  If someone else wants to
step up, they're welcome to do so.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to