> On 22.05.26 08:54, Tom Lane wrote: >> I don't like either version of this proposal, because I fear it >> puts way too much faith in our ability to adhere to a fixed release >> calendar. What happens if "v2027" slips into 2028? Are we then >> unable to resume the normal schedule for the following release?
A different angle came up in the AI-focused unconference session at PGConf.dev: somebody speculated that use of AI might accelerate our development cycle to the point where it'd be sensible to have two major releases per year.
Not only these points, but if a release occurs in December, the version will seem outdated once the new year arrives in ~31 days. Users or enterprises will feel compelled, or pressured, to upgrade because the name will appear ancient to their clients if they are using v2025, for example. -1 on using the year.
