Re: 10.0 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: 10.0
Date
Msg-id 57364C11.4040004@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 10.0  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: 10.0  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 05/13/2016 05:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> An analogy that might get some traction among database geeks is that
> version numbers are a sort of surrogate key, and assigning meaning to
> surrogate keys is a bad idea.
>
>             

:-)

I agree year-based numbers will cause us grief.

I don't have any strong opinions about this. It's essentially a 
marketing decision, and I'm happy to leave that to others. If and when 
we do change, I'd like to put in a modest request that we add an extra _ 
to the branch names, like this: REL_10_0_STABLE. That would mean they 
would sort nicely, which would make my life simpler in a few places in 
the buildfarm code. If not, I'd like a little advance notice so I can 
check all the places where we compare branch names.

cheers

andrew



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: 10.0
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: 10.0