| From: | Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: The case for version number inflation |
| Date: | 2013-03-11 07:13:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAKt_Zfu0f-D0vZ1B9Ax8_wqmXd3sDRVx6X4TrjOi8zPU7bSX+w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 12:30 AM, Hans-Jürgen Schönig
<postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>wrote:
>
> this is exactly the point. nobody will worry if he uses PostgreSQL 78 or
> PostgreSQL 79 - even if the change is significantly.
> what was said about firefox is absolutely correct - personally i don't
> care at all and somebody should read the docs before deciding on
> fundamental infrastructure such as a database.
> maybe i am too conservative but inflation has never solved a problem - not
> in real life and not in versioning.
>
To be honest I am more worried about worrying whether he is using Postgres
94, Postgres 95, or Postgres 96.
At least with the current numbering scheme that problem is well out of the
way.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Travers | 2013-03-11 07:34:31 | Re: The case for version number inflation |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-03-11 02:34:04 | Re: The case for version number inflation |