On tis, 2012-03-06 at 16:15 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> > On mån, 2012-03-05 at 19:37 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> The exact case is that the user was using plpython2u in PG 9.0, but
> >> the PG 9.1 one-click installer only supplies plpython3u.
> >
> > That seems like a pretty stupid choice to me, if it's true.
> >
> > That doesn't address your issue, but users shouldn't be forced to drop
> > their languages during an upgrade in the first place.
>
> Hmm. I had been thinking that it is only possible to support one or
> the other, thus the need for a compatibility break at some point would
> be forced, but reading the documentation, it seems that it we can ship
> both as long as nobody tries to use both at the same time. I wonder
> why we didn't do that.
Even if only one version were allowed, it would have been way too early
to switch to Python 3.
