Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly

Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> writes:
> As a matter of curiosity, what would constitute "8.0" as opposed to,
> say, 7.4? (I know that 7.0 happened partly because a great whack of
> new features went in, but I haven't found anything in the -hackers
> archives to explain why the number change. Maybe it's just a phase
> of the moon thing, or something.)

I remember quite a deal of argument about whether to call it 7.0 or 6.6;
we had started that cycle with the assumption that it would be called
6.6, and changed our minds near the end. Personally I'd have preferred
to stick the 7.* label on starting with the next release (actually
called 7.1) which had WAL and TOAST in it. That was really a
significant set of changes, both on the inside and outside.

You could make a fair argument that the upcoming 7.3 ought to be
called 8.0, because the addition of schema support will break an
awful lot of client-side code ;-). But I doubt we will do that.

regards, tom lane