Peter Eisentraut-2 wrote > On 3/18/14, 11:22 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Actually, if you run a buildfarm animal you have considerable control >> over what it tests. > > I appreciate that. My problem here isn't time or ideas or coding, but > lack of hardware resources. If I had hardware, I could set up tests for > every build dependency under the sun.
I don't imagine there is enough churn in this area that having a constantly testing buildfarm animal is a strong need; but a wiki page dedicated to "Python Support in PostgreSQL" where we can publicly and officially release testing results and commentary would be an improvement. As it sounds like the only caveat to supporting 2.3 is that we don't technically (or do we - is Decimal mandatory?) support an un-modified core installation but require that at one add-on module be installed. Assuming that clears up all the errors Tom is seeing then saying that plpythonu works with a slightly modified 2.3 on all current releases of PostgreSQL isn't a stretch nor does it commit us to fixing bugs in the unlikely event that any are discovered in two extremely stable environments. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Minimum-supported-version-of-Python-tp5796175p5796615.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
