| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Release versioning inconsistency |
| Date: | 2012-06-20 15:20:55 |
| Message-ID: | 26538.1340205655@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On ons, 2012-06-20 at 13:26 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> That might actually be a good idea. We can't really change the way we
>> named the betas, but it's not too late to consider naming the actual
>> release as 9.2.0...
> The final release was always going to be called 9.2.0, but naming the
> beta 9.2.0betaX is wrong. There was a previous discussion about that
> particular point.
Yes. There is no reason to change the naming scheme we have been using
for years now (at least since version_stamp.pl was invented for 7.4).
The only problem is that somebody got the name of the directory wrong on
the FTP server.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2012-06-20 15:25:30 | Re: Pg default's verbosity? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-06-20 15:14:07 | Re: Allow WAL information to recover corrupted pg_controldata |