Re: New version numbering practices

* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I suspect I'll end up using 10.x somewhat frequently though I'm mostly on
> > the lists. I suspect the choice will be dependent on context and channel.
>
> Hmm, that seems like a workable answer as well, and one that's traceable
> to our past habits.

For my 2c, I'd kind of prefer v10, but I could live with 10.x.

Not sure that I have any real reason for that preference other than
'v10' is slightly shorter and seems more 'right', to me. Perhaps
because '10.x' implies a *released* version to me (10.1, 10.2, 10.3),
whereas you asked about a *branch*, which would generally include some
patches past the latest point release.

In other words, "are you going to back-patch this to 10.x?" doesn't seem
quite right, whereas "are you going to back-patch this to v10?" lines up
correctly in my head, but I don't hold that distinction very closely and
either would work.

Thanks!

Stephen