Re: [HACKERS] TAP backpatching policy

On 05/30/2017 09:52 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Tom,

>> Um ... but we still have 2 live pre-9.4 branches.  If your proposal
>> doesn't extend to back-porting all of this stuff as far as 9.2,
>> I don't see what this is really buying.  We'd still need version cutoff
>> checks in the tests.
> 
> I don't believe the explicit goal of this is to remove the version
> checks but rather to provide improved testing coverage in our
> back-branches.  If we have to keep a version cutoff check for that, so
> be it.

+1

> 
>> (If you *do* propose back-patching all this stuff as far as 9.2, I'm not
>> quite sure what I'd think about that.  But the proposal as stated seems
>> like questionable half measures.)
> 
> I find that to be an extremely interesting idea, for my own 2c, but I'm
> not sure how practical it is.
It is perfectly reasonable to say, "We have added comprehensive testing 
through the TAP project. Unfortunately, it is only reasonable (due to 
code changes) to back port them from 9.4 and above."

*IF* we were to try to go back farther than 9.4, I would say that 9.3 is 
the only one that would be worth it anyway. 9.2 was a great release but 
it's day is over or at least it is a spectacle of a setting sun:

https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/

Thanks,

JD




-- 
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/                        +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.