Re: Version Numbering -- The great debate - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Version Numbering -- The great debate
Date
Msg-id 200408010127.i711RHC17099@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Version Numbering -- The great debate  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I am fine with either numbering, but I think the 8.0 might make more
sense.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> What was the rule for increasing the first number after just before
> >> 7.0?
> 
> > That was just to avoid having to release a 6.6.6, which Jan had clearly 
> > been working towards. :-)
> 
> AFAIR, we had informally been referring to that release as 6.6 right up
> until about the start of beta, when it was proposed that it should be
> called 7.0 because of the extent of the changes since 6.5, and that
> motion carried.  If we decide now to rename 7.5 to 8.0, it will be
> exactly the same process.  I don't think Peter's process-based
> objections are valid at all.
> 
> It strikes me that we have more than enough major changes since 7.4 to
> justify calling this 8.0, both in terms of major features that users
> have been asking for, and in terms of the extent of internal
> reorganization (and consequent need for beta testing ...).
> 
> > Seriously, major version jumps correspond to epoch-like changes, like 
> > when the code moved out of Berkeley, or when we switched from bug 
> > fixing to adding features.
> 
> Two commments about that.  One, I think you are engaging in historical
> revisionism about the reason for the 6.6/7.0 renaming.  I don't recall
> that 7.0 marked any particular watershed in terms of our general bug
> level, nor that we saw it in those terms when we decided to renumber.
> 
> Two, I think 7.5/8.0 will indeed be epochal in terms of the size of our
> user community.  Win32 native support will mean a great deal on the low
> end, and savepoints, PITR, and reliable replication (Slony) will mean a
> great deal in terms of our credibility as an enterprise-class database.
> 
>             regards, tom lane
> 
> PS: IIRC I was on the "nay" side in the 6.6-to-7.0 rename vote, so I
> think I definitely have standing to be in favor this time.
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
> 
>                http://archives.postgresql.org
> 

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Trapping QUERY_CANCELED: yes, no, maybe?
Next
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: Version Numbering -- The great debate