On 12/18/2015 09:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
On 2015-12-18 12:06:43 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
Well, Tom, Alvaro, and I all pretty much said that removing things
when it's blocking further development makes sense, but that there's
no hurry to remove anything else. That sounds like what you are
saying, too. So what's the actual disagreement here?
I'm saying that 10 year deprecation periods don't make sense. Either we
decide to remove the compat switch because we dislike it for $reasons,
in which case it should be removed sooner. Or we decide to keep the
switch indefinitely.
Forever is an awfully long time. I think that it's OK to remove
backward-compatibility features at some point even if they're not
really harming anything. I think the time before we do that should be
long, but I don't think it needs to be forever.
Why not just keep it at the same rate as our support policy? The feature
gets 5 years, then it is removed.
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
