Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> 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
