Re: PG20 Minimum Dependency Thread - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: PG20 Minimum Dependency Thread
Date
Msg-id ak8zIOUFZ9x6ypi2@paquier.xyz
Whole thread
In response to Re: PG20 Minimum Dependency Thread  (Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: PG20 Minimum Dependency Thread
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 08, 2026 at 11:51:06AM -0700, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 11:34 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> But that doesn't matter much given that your list
>> shows other LTS distros still on 3.0.
>
> Right. I think 3.0 would be a reasonable floor for PG20, honestly. I'm
> a little concerned about how long the Deb-alikes are going to end up
> pinning it, but... one step at a time.

That would mean to drop OpenSSL 1.1.1, as there is nothing in-between
up to 3.0.0.  That feels OK to drop for PG20, even if support for 3.0
will end in a few months, as of September 2026:
https://openssl-library.org/roadmap/
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: PSQL - prevent describe listing tables that are already in listed schemas
Next
From: solai v
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] no table rewrite when set column type to constrained domain