Re: what's going on with lapwing?
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: what's going on with lapwing? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaHwcUjzem+GCNS6J80KOcX7Snz6hiqr3LKvaU=0-uKJA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: what's going on with lapwing? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: what's going on with lapwing?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 2:13 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > It's hard to "mandate" anything in a distributed project like this. > I don't really see a need to either, at least for cases where an > old animal isn't causing us extra work. I don't know, to me it feels like we have the argument about whether StegosaurOS is actually dead or whether there might be survivors of the Chixulub impact hiding somewhere several times a year. The participants in those discussions are always pretty much always the same, and their opinions are pretty much always the same, and the threads are long and tiresome. Eventually we usually get consensus to forcibly retire some OS that's been EOL for 5 or 10 years and then we do it all over again the next time somebody's losing their mind. I think all of that energy could be better spent. What really makes this unfortunate is that we typically only have this discussion after that machine has ALREADY caused a bunch of hassle for a bunch of people. You commit something, the BF turns red, you fix it. You do the same thing again. Then maybe a third time. By the time we actually get consensus to remove things, they're generally not just MOSTLY dead. They're at the point where all you can do is check their pockets for loose change. They have kicked the bucket, shuffled off this mortal coil, run down the curtain and gone to join the choir invisible. They are ex-operating systems. It just doesn't seem reasonable to me that you have to basically show up and prove that you've already wasted 100 hours or whatever on a defunct OS before we'll consider giving it the boot. It's a predictable outcome. Once the OS is dead, you can't easily upgrade to newer software versions, which is eventually going to break something for somebody, not to mention that eventually no PG developer other than the BF member owner will be able to get access to a copy of that OS to fix anything that breaks. It's only a matter of time before that becomes an inconvenience. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: