On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:36 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Maybe we could compromise on
>
> If the expected PG major version release date is more than N years
> after the end of full support for an LTS distribution, that OS
> version does not need to be supported.
>
> Defining it relative to "full support" also reduces questions about
> whether extended support means the same thing to every LTS vendor.
>
> If we set N=2 then we could drop RHEL8 support in PG 19; if we
> set N=3 then it'd be PG 20 (measuring from end of full support
> in May 2024). I'd be okay with either outcome.
I see that RHEL8 support is ending [1], hooray! Are we comfortable
applying the "N=2" rule to all of our LTS targets? And is this thread
the de facto policy going forward?
--Jacob
[1] https://yum.postgresql.org/news/news-rhel8-end-of-life/
