Re: 10.0

From: Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 10.0
Date: 2016-05-14 18:02:19
Message-ID: 5737682B.1020708@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

+1 for going with 10.0 after 9.6 and 11.0 afterwards, etc.

It will hopefully both end these discussions and remove the confusion
the current versioning scheme has (I too heard way to many times about
people using postgres8 or postgres9).

For those saying this is version inflation. I don't see the problem, we
are project with long history, which releases major version every year,
I don't see why version number shouldn't reflect that.

About changing first digit only when we break compatibility with
applications for example by removing money type. We do have app breaking
incompatibilities in almost every major version so in effect we'd have
to bump the first digit every time anyway if we went with that schema (I
still remember working on db that was kept on 8.3 till EOL just because
we changes hashtext implementation, or db which was kept back because of
removal plgpsql rename clause where nobody wanted to rewrite couple
thousand function which used it and there are many examples like that).

--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

  • Re: 10.0 at 2016-05-14 14:23:41 from Joshua D. Drake

Responses

  • Re: 10.0 at 2016-05-15 12:29:45 from Álvaro Hernández Tortosa

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2016-05-14 19:56:27 Re: Perf Benchmarking and regression.
Previous Message Martín Marqués 2016-05-14 18:02:10 Re: 10.0