Re: Maintenance Policy?

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> I think we can avoid most of these problems by making a "best effort"
>> policy rather than a hard promise. But it can be moderately specific
>> about what we will make best efforts towards. I agree that anyone who
>> wants a hard promise should be getting commercial support.
>>
>
> I don't mind the idea of saying "our intention is to support new
> releases for about five years", or something equally squishy.
> But a list of dates in black and white does not look reasonable,
> especially not dates that are four or five years out for versions
> that have zero track record. We have no idea whatsoever what the
> future will bring.
>
Would it be reasonable to have the "squishy intention" coupled with a
more firm policy of "...EOL will be announced X months in
advance...Users requiring firm long-term EOL commitments are advised to
purchase commercial support..."

Perhaps the postgresql.org home-page should be modified slightly.
Instead of "Latest Releases" (which doesn't even list 7.4 when I just
looked), it could be something like "Current Releases". Then when EOL is
announced, the release could be suffixed with the EOL date (i.e. 7.4.25
EOL 2009-12-31 - maybe even with the EOL date in bold and/or red) which
would link to the EOL announcement or general EOL statement page.

I think that a "EOL Statement" link to a page with the generic statement
placed just below the oldest release could be helpful as well.

Cheers,
Steve