Re: minimum Meson version - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jelte Fennema-Nio
Subject Re: minimum Meson version
Date
Msg-id CAGECzQQo8ZP2dqHNX+0Qwu_8paqrMja+d5EHfN7=atzJSwQnhA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: minimum Meson version  (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>)
Responses Re: minimum Meson version
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 at 07:38, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
> That's probably ok for developers, but then again, probably no one
> develops PostgreSQL master on RHEL 8.  But production RPM builds need to
> be done "in system", with the build tools being provided by
> vendor-supplied RPMs themselves, with all the signatures, attestations,
> and all that stuff that comes with it nowadays.

Okay, so maybe pip install is not what they want. But they could still
create a recent ninja & meson RPM themselves right. I assume they know
how to do that, because they'd need to do the same for PostgreSQL too
if they care about all the things you mentioned.

And what I just don't understand about this whole discussion: We're
talking about people who want to be frozen in time for 5 years
straight during this "maintenance support" window by the vendor (whom
they are paying), with only access to security fixes. But somehow they
do want to run the latest Postgres Major release, even though the one
that they had running still receives bug fixes and security fixes. I
just don't understand who these people are. Why do they care about
having no changes to their system to avoid breakage as much as
possible, except for their piece of primary database software, of
which they're happily running the bleeding edge.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Matt Smith (matts3)"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add an ldflags_sl meson build option
Next
From: Bertrand Drouvot
Date:
Subject: Re: POC: enable logical decoding when wal_level = 'replica' without a server restart