[postgis-devel] Vote to drop support for 8.4 in 2.1

[Chris Hodgson]

+1 sounds good to me. We still have back to PostGIS 1.3 for download on 
the website if people absolutely need to run old versions of Postgres.

Chris

On 12-05-22 11:46 PM, Paragon Corporation wrote:
> Now that we are all entrenched in 2.1, I'd like to get this out of the 
> way so we don't have to waste time testing it anymore.
> I propose we drop 8.4 support in 2.1 because:
> 1) 2.1 is going to have to support 9.0,9.1,9.2 (and yikes maybe even 9.3)
> 2) There are many changes in how plpgsql works between 8.4 and the 9.0 
> that makes it difficult to cross
> test - for example how aliases are handled in 9.0 -- so code that 
> works in 8.4 may not work in 9.0
> 3) lack of ordered by aggs in 8.4 which I feel might be important 
> later on for raster and topology
> 4) improvements in window functionality in 9.0 missing in 8.4 (e.g. 
> great improvements in RANGE and intro of numbered ROWS)
> which again would be useful probably more so for topology (possibly 
> tiger geocoder) than any other piece of PostGIS.
> 5) 9.1 and 9.2 will support KNN GIST, 9.2 will support SP GIST so we 
> are already coding exceptions.  I know we still have to for 9.0
> 6) PGXS - Mark's hack is needed for 8.4 but not for 9.0 etc. -- Mark 
> can you confirm?
> 7)  I think in 2.2 we'll probably be forced to drop 9.0 and dropping 
> two versions in one release I think is too steep of a slope for our users.
> Thanks,
> Regina
> http://www.postgis.us
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
> http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/attachments/20120523/242fe0f8/attachment.html>