Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am
Date: 2002-07-05 16:37:12
Message-ID: 3D25CB38.6787FB6@fourpalms.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

> Actually, the "big" change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
> understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ... which,
> I'm guessing, is pretty major, no? :)

I've always thought of our release numbering as having "themes". The 6.x
series took Postgres from interesting but buggy to a solid system, with
a clear path to additional capabilities. The 7.x series fleshes out SQL
standards compliance and rationalizes the O-R features, as well as adds
to robustness and speed with WAL etc. And the 8.x series would enable
Postgres to extend to distributed systems etc., quite likely having some
fundamental restructuring of the way we handle sources of data (remember
our discussions a couple years ago regarding "tuple sources"?).

So I feel that bumping to 8.x just for schemas is not necessary. I
*like* the idea of having more than one or two releases in a series, and
would be very happy to see a 7.3 released.

- Thomas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lamar Owen 2002-07-05 16:39:13 Re: (A) native Windows port
Previous Message Laurette Cisneros 2002-07-05 16:18:21 Re: epoch from date field

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lamar Owen 2002-07-05 16:39:13 Re: (A) native Windows port
Previous Message Manfred Koizar 2002-07-05 16:24:37 Typo in htup.h comment