On 05/25/2013 05:39 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> 2. Name the next release after that 10.0 (would have been 9.5). We
> declare now that
> a) 10.0 will support on-line upgrade from 9.4 (only)
> b) various major incompatibilities will be introduced in 10.0 - the
> change in release number will indicate to everybody that is the case
> c) agree that there will be no pg_upgrade patch from 9.4 to 10.0, so
> that we will not be constrained by that
While we're talking about changing things, what about:
- Switching to single-major-version release numbering. The number of
people who say "PostgreSQL 9.x" is amazing; even *packagers* get this
wrong and produce "postgresql-9" packages. Witness Amazon Linux's awful
PostgreSQL packages for example. Going to PostgreSQL 10.0, 11.0, 12.0,
etc with a typical major/minor scheme might be worth considering.
- s/cluster/server/g . Just because "cluster" is historical usage
doesn't make it any less confusing for users.
*dives for asbestos fire suit*
-- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
