On Friday, May 13, 2016, Bruce Momjian <
bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 12:05:34PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Dave Page (dpage@pgadmin.org) wrote:
> > I imagine the bigger issue will be apps that have been written
> > assuming the first part of the version number is only a single digit.
>
> Let's just go with 2016 instead then.
>
> At least then users would see how old the version they're running is (I
> was just recently dealing with a 8.4 user...).
We tried, that, "Postgres95". ;-)
Even better, we're being retro! It's in style! ;)
Stephen
