Re: [PATCH] Add native windows on arm64 support

On 14.09.23 11:39, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 13 Sep 2023, at 21:12, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 31.08.23 06:44, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I agree.  I'm really uncomfortable with claiming support for
>>> Windows-on-ARM if we don't have a buildfarm member testing it.
>>> For other platforms that have a track record of multiple
>>> hardware support, it might not be a stretch ... but Windows was
>>> so resolutely Intel-only for so long that "it works on ARM" is
>>> a proposition that I won't trust without hard evidence.  There
>>> are too many bits of that system that might not have gotten the
>>> word yet, or at least not gotten sufficient testing.
>>> My vote for this is we don't commit without a buildfarm member.
>>
>> I think we can have a multi-tiered approach, where we can commit support but consider it experimental until we have
buildfarmcoverage.
 
> 
> If it's experimental it should probably be behind an opt-in flag in
> autoconf/meson, or be reverted by the time REL_17_STABLE branches unless
> coverage has materialized by then.

The author's email is bouncing now, due to job change, so it's unlikely 
we will see any progress on this anymore.  I am setting it to returned 
with feedback.