Re: New version numbering practices

From: Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New version numbering practices
Date: 2016-08-04 13:53:38
Message-ID: CAB=Je-FGek7Ez9izkexQAo1wuiknfEGOcTE7aOq38nym7Cs5TA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> Sorry, but I don't buy that. I think sending both server_version and
> server_version_num would be silly, and we're certainly not going to stop
> sending server_version.
>

What is wrong with sending machine-readable value?

Vladimir

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mithun Cy 2016-08-04 13:54:03 "Some tests to cover hash_index"
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2016-08-04 13:52:21 Re: max_parallel_degree > 0 for 9.6 beta