-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160


>> 9.0.

> You don't have a code-name. All the cool kids have code-names
> for their projects.

I've got one: "Postgres"

Better yet, how about we bite the bullet and make the name change
official. Seems like a major version bump is the right time
to do it.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201001210726
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAktYR90ACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjDmACfVud6mJMRDX5poG1c+Y+z4UYw
jUIAnR9+OaIHNDwT3ZhiCivMF3skGJwn
=fWzV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

• Re: 8.5 vs. 9.0 at 2010-01-21 10:36:59 from Richard Huxton

Responses

• Re: 8.5 vs. 9.0 at 2010-01-21 12:35:47 from Devrim GÜNDÜZ
• Re: 8.5 vs. 9.0 at 2010-01-21 12:37:01 from Dave Page

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Devrim GÜNDÜZ	Date: 2010-01-21 12:35:47
	Subject: Re: 8.5 vs. 9.0
Previous:	From: Leonardo F	Date: 2010-01-21 12:00:09
	Subject: Re: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:	From: Devrim GÜNDÜZ	Date: 2010-01-21 12:35:47
	Subject: Re: 8.5 vs. 9.0
Previous:	From: Dave Page	Date: 2010-01-21 10:57:35
	Subject: Re: 8.5 vs. 9.0