On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Part of the reason I suggest this is because it seems that not much
>>> gets patched back that far any more.
>
>> Tom just backpatched something to 7.4 the other day.
>
> A quick look in the cvs history shows 5 commits to 7.4 since the last
> set of releases, 6 commits to 8.0, 8 to 8.1, 13 to 8.2, 18 to 8.3.
> A couple of these patches were Windows-specific and were made only back
> to 8.2 because we desupported Windows in older branches awhile back.
> So far as I can see, the others were all made as far back as applicable.
> I think the lack of churn in 7.4 just means it's gotten pretty darn
> stable.
>
> I'm not averse to EOL'ing 7.4, but I don't think it's fair to claim that
> we already stopped supporting it.
Well, that would be overstating my position. We haven't stopped
supporting it, but there's less and less stuff that applies that far
back. I think it's better to draw a line in the sand and say "we're
going to stop supporting this release on this date" rather than
letting it go on and on and then waking up and realizing "hmm, nothing
ever applies that far back any more, I guess we don't support it".
...Robert
