Re: [HACKERS] Shared library version

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Shared library version
Date: 2000-01-10 15:22:44
Message-ID: 3155.947517764@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> There appear to have been changes in the shared library libpq.
> Since the library has changed, it needs to have a new version number.

You're right, we need to bump the number before release (and I hope we
remember!). Past practice has not been to bump the number during
development cycles, since we'd shortly have ridiculously high version
numbers if we incremented them at every development change.

libpq++ has also had API changes requiring a new version number before
release, I think --- any others?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-01-10 15:37:32 Re: [HACKERS] Number of index fields configurable
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-01-10 15:06:58 Re: [HACKERS] Number of index fields configurable