| From: | Martín Marqués <martin(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Mair <chris(at)1006(dot)org>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New versioning scheme |
| Date: | 2016-05-13 20:17:39 |
| Message-ID: | 990c9ffd-d844-f1b5-7026-57812ce4ed10@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
El 13/05/16 a las 08:39, Chris Mair escribió:
>> so renaming the current 9.6 as 10, or the next (9.7) as 10 - seems
>> quite reasonable to me.
>
> Hi,
>
> is renaming the current 9.6 as 10 still an option, now that 9.6 beta 1
> has been released?
I hope not.
Developers are already applying changes to their tools which check on
postgres version is running to apply one code or another (or to use
options specific to 9.6).
Not a burden, but I'd prefer to concentrate on other tasks.
Regards,
--
Martín Marqués http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-05-13 20:19:03 | Re: When should be advocate external projects? |
| Previous Message | Darren Duncan | 2016-05-13 20:02:03 | Re: New versioning scheme |