Re: Version Numbering

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 11:36:55AM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> On Aug 20, 2010, at 11:34 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>
> > +1 for three-number versions...well, until we really see the light
> > and go to two-number versions. 8.3 and 8.4 are different enough
> > that they shouldn't even mildly appear the same, for example.
>
> No idea what you mean by that, but generally it's a bad idea to
> switch from dotted-integer version numbers and numeric version
> numbers. See Perl (Quel désastre!).

I'm thinking that after 9.0, the first release of the next major
version should be 10.0, and the one after that, 11.0, etc., etc.

The current system give people the completely false impression that
7.0 and 7.4 are somehow similar.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate