Tom Lane wrote:
The other side of the coin is that people running such old versions are
in it for stability --- they don't *want* bugs fixed, unless they're
bugs they've hit themselves.  Major fixes that would possibly
destabilize the code base would be exactly what's not wanted.  Every
time I get Red Hat to ship an update version, it's only after fighting
tooth and nail to do a "rebase" instead of cherry-picking just the fixes
for bugs that paying customers have specifically complained about.  The
fact that we're pretty conservative about what we back-patch is the only
reason I ever win any of those arguments.

                        

I don't find anything wrong with this picture. The other upside of our being conservative about what we back-patch is that users have much more confidence in the community edition. If we were less so, we'd find more users on older, vendor-supported versions, which would be more out of date than they are now, for the reasons Tom outlines above.

cheers

andrew


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to