On 14.09.23 11:39, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
On 13 Sep 2023, at 21:12, Peter Eisentraut <pe...@eisentraut.org> wrote:
On 31.08.23 06:44, Tom Lane wrote:
I agree. I'm really uncomfortable with claiming support for
Windows-on-ARM if we don't have a buildfarm member testing it.
For other platforms that have a track record of multiple
hardware support, it might not be a stretch ... but Windows was
so resolutely Intel-only for so long that "it works on ARM" is
a proposition that I won't trust without hard evidence. There
are too many bits of that system that might not have gotten the
word yet, or at least not gotten sufficient testing.
My vote for this is we don't commit without a buildfarm member.
I think we can have a multi-tiered approach, where we can commit support but
consider it experimental until we have buildfarm coverage.
If it's experimental it should probably be behind an opt-in flag in
autoconf/meson, or be reverted by the time REL_17_STABLE branches unless
coverage has materialized by then.
The author's email is bouncing now, due to job change, so it's unlikely
we will see any progress on this anymore. I am setting it to returned
with feedback.
