Re: [HACKERS] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?

From: David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, postgresql advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
Date: 2004-06-06 06:42:52
Message-ID: 40C2BCEC.4040104@zara.6.isreserved.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
>>Granted, the script itself is faulty, but since some other OS projects
>>(like Ruby, with the same x.y.z numbering) do guarantee they never will
>>have double digits in version number component
>
> Oh? What's their plan for the release after 9.9.9?

As for Ruby, it probably won't expect > 9.9.9 in any foreseeable future.
It takes +- 10 years to get to 1.8.1. Same with Python. But Perl will
have 5.10.0.

--
dave

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2004-06-06 09:21:14 Re: [HACKERS] Slony-I goes BETA (possible bug)
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2004-06-06 01:06:34 Re: PostgreSQL certifications?

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2004-06-06 09:21:14 Re: [HACKERS] Slony-I goes BETA (possible bug)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-06-06 05:12:01 Re: Official Freeze Date for 7.5: July 1st, 2004