On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 10:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> > On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 06:59, Justin Clift wrote:
> >> The only thing that makes me wince is that we have a protocol change at
> >> PostgreSQL 7.4 release instead of 8.0.
>
> > ...which is why I'd advocate making this release an 8.0 regardless of
> > win32 or pitr.
>
> <shrug> ... The backend will still talk to old clients, and libpq will
> still talk to old backends, so I don't think the protocol change is
> really going to cause a flag day for anyone. On a technical level it's
> probably not an adequate reason to call this release 8.0.
>
Can you give me an example of a technical change that would warrant a
major version bump?
> On the other hand, I dislike the notion that we would call a release 8.0
> simply because it now has a native Windows port. (And if there is a
> short release cycle after this one, that might be about the only big new
> thing there.) Considering that we aren't going to be recommending the
> Windows port for production work, we should not let the release
> numbering give the impression we think it's the greatest Postgres
> feature ever to come down the pike.
>
yep.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
