On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 16:37 +0000, Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> > Unless there are unfixable data loss bugs in it, I say we keep it.
> >
> > Many people still run it, so why make them move?
>
> There are non-trivial amounts of effort required to produce and test
> packages for each branch we maintain. That affects all of the
> packagers to varying degrees and should not be overlooked.
This presumes a single group of packagers that does all releases. We'd
be the only project that does that, AFAICS.
Seems strange to limit tasks to just the same few people all the time.
We could ask for volunteer maintainers for releases, rather than just
say "the X people that do all the work no longer wish to do it and so
we're not going to let anyone else either". No volunteers, no releases.
That is exactly how this current project got started in the first place
- picking up the maintenance responsibility on code that the original
authors no longer wished to maintain.
As in all things, any major changes with respect to packages should be
discussed publicly, with notice given of any changes. Anybody that feels
it is worth supporting could then come forward to do so.
I hope we can avoid a sarcastic "over to you then Simon" reply. I'm not
volunteering for it, but we should give others the opportunity to do so.
My belief is there is a substantial user community for 7.4, and for 7.3
also. There is no reason why we should act like a commercial company
when we're a volunteer organisation.
So suggestion: announce that 7.4 will be EOLd in 6 months unless
volunteers come forward to support further releases. At the same time,
announce what the EOL plans are for other releases, so people can begin
planning upgrades. In most stable production systems the planning cycle
can extend to years, rather than weeks or months.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
