Re: Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?

From: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
To: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
Date: 2003-11-18 02:20:45
Message-ID: m3smkmct8i.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

Oops! josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com (Josh Berkus) was seen spray-painting on a wall:
> Given all that, don't people think it's time to jump to 8.0? Seems
> like even 7.4 is hardly recognizable as the same database as 7.0.

If wishes were fishes... Shouldn't we see what interesting features
actually _do_ make it in?

If Win32 support does get ready, and we get recursive queries (I'll
point out different TODO items :-)) and Slony-1, PITR, and cache
improvements make it in, then perhaps it's time to call it 8.0. A
"cvs update -Pd" doesn't get me that yet, so it seems early.

I'd _almost_ buy the story that 7.4 should have been called 8.0,
although that _didn't_ happen because it 'just missed' PITR and Win32.

The amusing approach would be to jump straight to 8.1 :-).
--
wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('cbbrowne','acm.org').
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/postgresql.html
..you could spend *all day* customizing the title bar. Believe me. I
speak from experience." -- Matt Welsh

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2003-11-18 02:22:22 Re: advocacy.postgresql.org: page dedicated to
Previous Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2003-11-18 02:20:26 Re: advocacy.postgresql.org: page dedicated to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2003-11-18 02:22:12 Re: Release cycle length
Previous Message Larry Rosenman 2003-11-18 02:01:50 Re: help!