On 9/11/18 10:08 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 09/09/2018 18:01, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> As for a specific suggestion, I would amend our current policy to state
>>> that we support each major version for 5 years, with the last release of
>>> a given major version being the planned minor release following the 5
>>> year mark.
>>
>> Seems reasonable to me. Maybe s/planned/scheduled/ for clarity.
>
> So that would mean that if the EOL month is September and the next minor
> release is scheduled for November, but we do an unplanned release in
> October, we would then have to still support it until November? Or if
> we skip the November release, we have to keep going until February?
>
> I think a bit of ambiguity is good here. After the EOL month, you're on
> your own. We might do something afterwards for technical or bookkeeping
> reasons or because we think it's important, but don't count on it.
> Maybe in five years we'll be releasing a minor every three weeks, how do
> we adjust the policy then? Let's not over-specify this.
+1. I think the first sentence in the "PostgreSQL Release Support Policy
section clearly states what happens:
"The PostgreSQL Global Development Group aims to support a major release
for five years. After its end-of-life (EOL) month ends, a major version
receives one final minor release. After that final minor release, bug
fixing ceases for that major version."
That said, maybe it's better to make that the first sentence on the
page, as really that's the most important part. Details on how things
are numbered, upgrades, etc. could go closer to the table.
Thoughts?
Jonathan
