Re: Odd release numbers for development versions?

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> "Robert B. Easter" <reaster(at)comptechnews(dot)com> writes:
> > Like 7.0.x would be the current stable branch. 7.1.x, the current
> > development branch. The next stable branch would be 7.2.x. Within
> > the current even release stable branch, maybe only do bug fixes. In
> > the odd dev releases, focus on new/experiemental. Both branches could
> > have very frequent *.x revisions/builds.

> This has been proposed before, and rejected before. The key developers
> mostly don't believe that the Linux style "release early, release often"
> approach is appropriate for the Postgres project. Few people are
> interested in running beta-quality databases, so there's no point in
> going to the effort of maintaining two development tracks.

If the Linux kernel used CVS like a reasonable Free Software effort,
then the current odd/even split wouldn't even be necessary. We use CVS
-- if you want development trees to play with, you fetch the tree by
anon CVS and update as often as you need to. There is absolutely no
need for a Linux-style release system with CVS.

Don't get me wrong; I like and use Linux. I just like the PostgreSQL
development model better.

"Release Stable; release when necessary" is all that is needed when the
developers use CVS properly. You want to be a developer? Grab the CVS
tree and start hacking. Patches are readily accepted if they are
acceptable.

--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11