From: | Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Numbering of the next release: 8.0 vs 7.4 |
Date: | 2003-03-12 15:38:22 |
Message-ID: | 3E6F546E.8040106@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
>
>>FWIW, the 6.4 protocol change didn't force a move from 6.3.2 to 7.0.
>
>
> True, but that was a much smaller change than what we're contemplating
> here. AFAIR, those changes did not affect the majority of applications
> --- they only needed to relink with a newer client library, and voila
> they spoke the new protocol perfectly well. The planned changes for
> error handling (error codes, etc) will be something that will affect
> almost every app. They won't *need* to change, maybe, but they'll
> probably *want* to change.
>
> But let's wait till feature freeze to have this discussion; we'll know
> better by then exactly what we're talking about.
Yep, that sounds like the best idea.
:-)
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
> regards, tom lane
--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-03-12 15:43:31 | Re: Numbering of the next release: 8.0 vs 7.4 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-03-12 15:34:57 | Re: Numbering of the next release: 8.0 vs 7.4 |