| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Hammond <andrew(dot)george(dot)hammond(at)gmail(dot)com>, CAJ CAJ <pguser(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-www <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [GENERAL] programmatic way to fetch latest release for a given major.minor version |
| Date: | 2007-04-10 14:42:07 |
| Message-ID: | 25896.1176216127@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-www |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> It makes sense to store things separately when they have a semantic
> difference. What we call "major" is the first two digits and dot. We
> call "minor" to the third digit, and that's all. We don't have
> "revisions". This is how it has ever been and we even document it as
> such. Offering the first two digits separately would be a mistake
> because it causes confusion over what's significant -- the first digit
> by itself is not significant.
While I agree with this position, ISTM that an easy compromise is
available: put both formats into the data.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2007-04-10 14:58:12 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] programmatic way to fetch latest release for a given major.minor version |
| Previous Message | Wilkinson, Jim | 2007-04-10 14:34:37 | EXECUTE in a funtion to return a VIEW object ID |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2007-04-10 14:58:12 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] programmatic way to fetch latest release for a given major.minor version |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-04-10 14:25:35 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] programmatic way to fetch latest release for a given major.minor version |