Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com, usleepless(at)gmail(dot)com, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?
Date: 2007-04-24 13:18:54
Message-ID: 200704240918.54598.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-hackers
On Tuesday 24 April 2007 01:32, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > That would be just because you don't know the numbering scheme.  8.2 to
> > > 8.3 is considered "major" in these parts.  See
> > > http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning
> >
> > Is that official policy? I don't see any mention of it in the docs.
>
> Are you somehow suggesting that our website isn't official? Where did you
> get that idea?
>

Website information can often be of a transient nature, with no history of 
changes or even the existence of information. Documentation is a little more 
permanent, and at least offers a record of agreement at a specific point in 
time. 

> As for inclusion in the docs I beleive we're still waiting for your
> patch...
>

We'll see  :-)

-- 
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2007-04-24 13:22:41
Subject: Re: TODO idea - implicit constraints across child tables with a common column as primary key (but obviously not a shared index)
Previous:From: Golden LiuDate: 2007-04-24 12:54:01
Subject: Google SoC: column-level privilege subsystem

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2007-04-24 13:45:15
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?
Previous:From: Gabriele BartoliniDate: 2007-04-24 10:48:46
Subject: T-shirts situation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group