On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 14:05, Justin Clift wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> <snip>
> > One way to tamp down expectations of client backwards compatibility
> > would be to call the release 8.0 instead of 7.4 ;-)
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Actually, I've been thinking about the numbering of the next PostgreSQL
> version for a few days now.
>
> The scenario that's appealing to me the most is this for the next release:
>
> PostgreSQL 8.0
> **************
>
> + Includes PITR and the Win32 port
>
> + Not sure where Satoshi is up to with his 2 phase commit proposal, but
> that might make sense to incorporate into a wire protocol revision.
> From memory he received funding to work on it, so it might be coming
> along nicely.
>
> + Other things optional of course.
>
>
> Personally, I'd rather we go for PostgreSQL 8.0, waiting a while extra
> for PITR and Win32 if needed, and also properly co-ordinate all of the
> release process information (website updates, package builds, Announce
> to the mailing lists and news sources).
>
I don't think PITR or Win32 (or even replication) warrant an 8.0, since
none of those should effect client/server interaction and/or backward
compatibility. (Or at least not as much as schema support did, which
required most "adminy" apps to be worked over)
A protocol change however, would warrant a version number bump IMHO. I
would guess that by the time all of the protocol changes could be
completed, we'd have win32 or pitr, so it will hopefully be moot.
Robert Treat
