Re: Planning incompatibilities for Postgres 10.0

On 05/27/2013 06:53 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
> On 05/28/2013 09:39 AM, Gavin Flower wrote:
>> Yes, I hate the Firefox style number inflation.
> I was arguing *for* it ;-)
>
> I don't like it much either, but (a) we do about one release a year, not
> one every few weeks and (b) it's very clear from a quick look at Stack
> Overflow or first-posts to pgsql-general how confusing two-part major
> versions are to users. If it's a bit less aesthetically pleasing I'm OK
> with that.
>

This argument comes up every couple of years and the people that are
trying to solve the problem by changing the versioning are ignoring the
fact that there is no problem to solve.

Consider the following exchange:

Client: I have X problem with PostgreSQL
CMD: What version?
Client: 9
CMD: Which version of 9?
Client: 9.0.2
CMD: You should be running 9.2.4 or at least 9.0.13

Now, if we change the version numbers:

Client: I have X problem with PostgreSQL
CMD: What version?
Client: 9
CMD: Which version of 9?
Client: 9.0.2
CMD: You should be running 10.0.5 or at least 9.0.13

The conversation does not change.

Further, we are not Firefox. We are not user software. We are developer
software.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake