| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: The First Digit WAS: The case for version number inflation |
| Date: | 2013-03-11 18:15:12 |
| Message-ID: | 513E1F30.80303@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
> I am fine with our current versioning system and I think it works to our
> advantage. However I do think we could use some extra effort to make sure
> we are on the same page regarding what these numbers mean.
Yes. Per my previous email, we have always incremented the first digit
because of major features which changed PostgreSQL's position in the
marketplace. As a PG advocacy geek, I'm reluctant to give that up; the
publicity around 9.0 really did give Postgres adoption a boost, and I
think we can make as much hay out of 10.0.
Personally, I'm thinking that we're more likely to have a 10.0 than a 9.4.
BTW, I'd say this thread has pretty much shot down any idea of changing
our version numbering system.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua Kramer | 2013-03-14 04:34:14 | Postgres vs. SQL Server on Reddit |
| Previous Message | Darren Duncan | 2013-03-11 17:52:15 | Re: The case for version number inflation |