Tom Lane wrote:
> But on the whole I think we should NOT have such a policy, at all.
> If we'd enunciated such a thing in 2005, we'd still be on the hook to
> support 8.0 on Windows; or else have had to go back on our word. The
> truth of the matter is that the community will make reasonable efforts
> to support back branches but we are not going to set anything in stone.
> If someone wants a guaranteed EOL date, they ought to be contracting
> with a commercial support company and paying appropriately.
>
>
>
I think we can avoid most of these problems by making a "best effort"
policy rather than a hard promise. But it can be moderately specific
about what we will make best efforts towards. I agree that anyone who
wants a hard promise should be getting commercial support.
cheers
andrew
