Re: Version Numbering - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Version Numbering
Date
Msg-id 25170.1282331704@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Version Numbering  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
Responses Re: Version Numbering
List pgsql-hackers
"David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com> writes:
> On Aug 20, 2010, at 12:02 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
>> So I count three integers in both 9.0rc1 and 9.0beta4

> No, I mean 9.0.0beta4. If we were to adopt the Semantic Versioning spec, one would *always* use X.Y.Z, with optional
ASCIIcharacters appended to Z to add meaning (including "less than unadorned Z).
 

Well, I for one will fiercely resist adopting any such standard, because
it's directly opposite to the way that RPM will sort such version numbers.
Apparently whoever wrote "Semantic Versioning" didn't bother to inquire
into existing practice.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Deadlock bug
Next
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: Version Numbering