On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Joshua D. Drake <j...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > 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.
I did discuss that exact question in several previous postings to this thread... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
