-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
Magnus Hagander reminded us:
> And we already have a version numbering scheme that confuses people :)
Exactly. I think it is time for us to realize that our beloved "major.minor"
versioning is a failure, both at a marketing and a technical level. It's a
lofty idea, but causes way more harm than good in real life. People on
pgsql-hackers know that 9.1 and 9.5 are wildly different beasts. Clients?
They are running "Postgres 9". So I'm all in favor of doing away with
major and minor.
However, this may break some things that expect a triple number, so one
solution is to market it as Postgres 10, Postgres 11, etc. but keep the
minor number - which shall never be changed. Thus, our next releases
become:
10.0.0
11.0.0
12.0.0
And the revisions stay the same:
10.0.1
10.0.2
10.0.3
11.0.1
12.0.1
12.0.2
etc.
- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201605121051
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iEYEAREDAAYFAlc0mK4ACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjOOwCfTXel0ks/v6uBtysXdVjh824G
thgAnjq0mV+/H6GuuuBm6yPaY3144oHK
=eWiG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
