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

Re: [HACKERS] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?

From: David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>,postgresql advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
Date: 2004-06-06 06:42:52
Message-ID: 40C2BCEC.4040104@zara.6.isreserved.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
>>Granted, the script itself is faulty, but since some other OS projects 
>>(like Ruby, with the same x.y.z numbering) do guarantee they never will 
>>have double digits in version number component
> 
> Oh?  What's their plan for the release after 9.9.9?

As for Ruby, it probably won't expect > 9.9.9 in any foreseeable future. 
It takes +- 10 years to get to 1.8.1. Same with Python. But Perl will 
have 5.10.0.

-- 
dave

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2004-06-06 09:21:14
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Slony-I goes BETA (possible bug)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-06-06 05:12:01
Subject: Re: Official Freeze Date for 7.5: July 1st, 2004

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2004-06-06 09:21:14
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Slony-I goes BETA (possible bug)
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2004-06-06 01:06:34
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL certifications?

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