| From: | Michael Banck <mbanck(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 10.0 |
| Date: | 2016-05-14 07:52:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20160514075212.GC29945@nighthawk.caipicrew.dd-dns.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 08:55:20PM -0400, David G. Johnston wrote:
> The opinion seems to be that major.0 is some kind of magic incantation in
> the broader world of users...
From my reading of the thread, while certainly that is the general
definition of a .0, having infrequent .0 releases is not very practical
for PostgreSQL because the major versions are not that different from
each other and all are treated the same development-wise. So it would be
a huge drain on the project to discuss which major version should be a
.0 unless planning towards them steps up significantly.
So I think the (slight) consensus is more that all major versions are
mostly equal and hence only one version number is needed.
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Seltenreich | 2016-05-14 09:10:24 | Just-in-time compiling things (was: asynchronous and vectorized execution) |
| Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2016-05-14 05:35:04 | Re: [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in parallel worker (ExecInitSubPlan) |