Re: Python 3.x versus PG 9.1 branch

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:46:07AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> [...] we've repeatedly not bothered
> to back-port regression test fixes for newer Pythons into that branch.
> I could just omit Python 3 coverage for that branch in the critter's
> configuration, but I wonder exactly why things are that way.
> 
> For clarity, to cover 9.1 I think we'd need to back-patch some subset
> of these commits:
> 
> f16d52269 ff2faeec5 d0765d50f 6bff0e7d9 527ea6684 8182ffde5
> 45d1f1e02 2cfb1c6f7
> 
> The precedent of not fixing 9.1 started with the last of these.

> Or we could just blow it off on the grounds that 9.1 is not long
> for this world anyhow.
> 
> Opinions anyone?

I respect the 2012-era decision to have 9.1 not support newer Python, and I
think the lack of user complaints validates it.  I wouldn't object to
overturning the decision, either.  The biggest risk, albeit still a small
risk, is that newer Python is incompatible with 9.1 in a way that the test
suite does not catch.