Re: The case for version number inflation

From: Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>
To: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: The case for version number inflation
Date: 2013-03-02 07:56:44
Message-ID: 5131B0BC.1020400@darrenduncan.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On 2013.03.01 10:19 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> 7.0 was because Postgres became crash-safe, and stopped crashing routinely.

Resilience to crashes by design is certainly a major feature when you didn't
have it before, and worthy of the 7.

So why doesn't http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/release-7-0.html make
any mention of this?

You'd think the major reason for the release naming would be highlighted at the
top of that page.

-- Darren Duncan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hans-Jürgen Schönig 2013-03-02 08:30:23 Re: The case for version number inflation
Previous Message Ian Lawrence Barwick 2013-03-02 06:01:07 Re: The case for version number inflation