Tom Lane wrote:
>Lamar Owen <lowen@pari.edu> writes:
>
>
>>Please, don't call it 7.3.6. Streamlining releases is terrible. 7.3.7 or
>>7.3.6.1 or SOMETHING other than 7.3.6, and just let 7.3.6 be a brown paper
>>bag release (like 6.4.1 was).
>>
>>
>
>There were no code-change differences in this rewrap, so I see no real
>need to change the version number.
>
>The lesson I'd prefer to see us take away from this is that Marc needs
>to automate his release wrapping process more. These sorta mistakes
>shouldn't have happened in the first place ...
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
How about in future, packaging it all up as a release candidate,
(ie. 7.4.2-rc1) for a week or so before official final release,
so package maintainers can build their scripts etc,
and small problems like this ironed out.
If anything needs to be corrected, it can be repackaged with a
bumped rc number until it is determined that everything is fine.
At which point the latest rc is renamed as the final release
(ie. 7.4.2).
Unless you already do this, and I've completely missed it somehow
--
Mark Gibson <gibsonm |AT| cromwell |DOT| co |DOT| uk>
Web Developer & Database Admin
Cromwell Tools Ltd.
Leicester, England.
