Re: 10.0 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Banck
Subject Re: 10.0
Date
Msg-id 20160514075212.GC29945@nighthawk.caipicrew.dd-dns.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 10.0  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 08:55:20PM -0400, David G. Johnston wrote:
> The opinion seems to be that major.0 is some kind of magic incantation in
> the broader world of users...

From my reading of the thread, while certainly that is the general
definition of a .0, having infrequent .0 releases is not very practical
for PostgreSQL because the major versions are not that different from
each other and all are treated the same development-wise. So it would be
a huge drain on the project to discuss which major version should be a
.0 unless planning towards them steps up significantly.

So I think the (slight) consensus is more that all major versions are
mostly equal and hence only one version number is needed.


Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Banck
Date:
Subject: Re: 10.0
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: exit() behavior on Windows?