On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 2:22 PM Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: > FWIW, my impression of that thread was that we had agreed on pretty > much everything except the value of N; if there was some later meeting > that discussed it further, I wasn't there.
Cool. > (hmm, I guess we didn't fill in $reasonable_timeframe, but that is > probably going to be case-by-case anyway) Sure. The first instance, if/when it happens, would probably be a trendsetter. > It's too late to change anything for PG19, I think, (right -- I didn't intend to propose a retroactive change, sorry for any confusion) > so it kind of doesn't > matter today whether we set N to 2 or 3. I think it still matters for impending decisions. For example, we're about to engineer how to backport a sliding window of Python across the sliding window of backbranch support. Shorter windows tie our hands less. But I agree that if that other thread is otherwise settled, we've effectively declared that RHEL 9 is the minimum for PG20, and that would make me very happy. Thanks, --Jacob
