| From: | Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: How can we get the word out about the change in version numbering? |
| Date: | 2016-08-21 08:58:38 |
| Message-ID: | CADxJZo1hTG6EwMaWktPpca3Xt5GyJk1hZn+tnUOrNWoG8_akNQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 at 09:21 Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> If you'd somehow missed it, we are going from three-part to two-part
> version numbers. That is, the next release is 9.6.0, but the major
> release after that is 10.0. 10.1 will be the first patch release on
> version 10.
>
Let's update the page at https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/ to
explain that "10" will be the next major number after "9.6".
We can add 9.6 and 10 to the table now, with "TBA" for the dates, to make
this more visually obvious. Maybe change the table caption from "EOL
Dates" to "PostgreSQL Major Versions".
Then at least we have somewhere authoritative to point people if they are
confused about the versioning scheme.
We might also want to add some guff about this to
https://www.postgresql.org/developer/roadmap/
Cheers,
BJ
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Damien Clochard | 2016-08-24 09:17:02 | Trends.... |
| Previous Message | Damien Clochard | 2016-08-20 09:50:25 | Re: How can we get the word out about the change in version numbering? |