> On Feb 25, 2019, at 13:38, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> 
> I think you might be right about this specific issue. But to me it
> sounds like you also don't appreciate that development resources are
> really constrained too, and providing endless backward compatibility for
> everything is going to use both resources directly, and indirectly by
> making the whole system more complex.

One of the things I've tried not to do in this discussion is turn it into a 
policy debate about backwards compatibility in general, rather than this very 
specific feature.  Of course, there's a cost to keeping around features, and I 
fully appreciate that.  In this discussion, the code complexity didn't seem to 
be the fundamental driver behind removing the feature; the relative safety of 
it was, along with maintaining the documentation.

I jumped in because there seemed to be an argument going on that all of the 
cool kids will have moved off the old interface and there was essentially no 
cost to removing it in v12 or v13, and that didn't correspond to my experience.

--
-- Christophe Pettus
   x...@thebuild.com


Reply via email to