From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
Cc: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am |
Date: | 2002-07-05 16:43:26 |
Message-ID: | 20020705134234.N22387-100000@mail1.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > Actually, the "big" change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
> > understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ... which,
> > I'm guessing, is pretty major, no? :)
>
> I've always thought of our release numbering as having "themes". The 6.x
> series took Postgres from interesting but buggy to a solid system, with
> a clear path to additional capabilities. The 7.x series fleshes out SQL
> standards compliance and rationalizes the O-R features, as well as adds
> to robustness and speed with WAL etc. And the 8.x series would enable
> Postgres to extend to distributed systems etc., quite likely having some
> fundamental restructuring of the way we handle sources of data (remember
> our discussions a couple years ago regarding "tuple sources"?).
>
> So I feel that bumping to 8.x just for schemas is not necessary. I
> *like* the idea of having more than one or two releases in a series, and
> would be very happy to see a 7.3 released.
Seems I'm the only one for 8.x, so 7.3 it is :)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-05 16:46:24 | Re: plpgsql: PERFORM SELECT id INTO TEMP TABLE .. |
Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2002-07-05 16:39:13 | Re: (A) native Windows port |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff MacDonald | 2002-07-05 16:48:38 | Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly |
Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2002-07-05 16:39:13 | Re: (A) native Windows port |