From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Tag refs/tags/REL_10_BETA1 was created |
Date: | 2017-05-17 02:37:07 |
Message-ID: | 3811.1494988627@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 5/16/17 18:14, pgsql(at)postgresql(dot)org wrote:
>> Tag refs/tags/REL_10_BETA1 was created.
> Was this change in naming pattern intentional?
Yes, it was. Andrew Dunstan suggested[1] during the
two-part-version-number discussion that we should start including a "_"
after REL in tag and branch names for v10 and later, so that those names
would sort correctly compared to the tag/branch names for earlier branches
(at least when using C locale). I believe his main concern was some logic
in the buildfarm, but it seems like a good idea in general.
When we get to v100, we'll need some other hack to make it work ...
but I plan to be safely dead by then.
BTW, I now remember having wondered[2] if we should make any other changes
in version-number formatting while we're at it, like maybe "10beta1"
should be "10.beta1". It's a bit late to have remembered it for beta1,
but is anyone hot to change anything else about these labels?
regards, tom lane
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/57364C11.4040004@dunslane.net
[2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20780.1463176901%40sss.pgh.pa.us
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-05-17 02:57:56 | pgsql: Check relkind of tables in CREATE/ALTER SUBSCRIPTION |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-05-17 02:20:02 | pgsql: psql: publication/subscription tab completion fixes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-05-17 02:39:29 | Re: COPY FROM STDIN behaviour on end-of-file |
Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2017-05-17 02:33:40 | Re: Improvement in log message of logical replication worker |