Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com, usleepless(at)gmail(dot)com, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?
Date: 2007-04-24 14:24:16
Message-ID: 462E1310.3070205@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 09:18:54AM -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 24 April 2007 01:32, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>>>>> That would be just because you don't know the numbering scheme. 8.2 to
>>>>> 8.3 is considered "major" in these parts. See
>>>>> http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning
>>>>>
>>>> Is that official policy? I don't see any mention of it in the docs.
>>>>
>>> Are you somehow suggesting that our website isn't official? Where did you
>>> get that idea?
>>>
>>>
>> Website information can often be of a transient nature, with no history of
>> changes or even the existence of information. Documentation is a little more
>> permanent, and at least offers a record of agreement at a specific point in
>> time.
>>
>
> Well, there is cvs history. But I see your point. Doesn't make it any less
> official, though, just transient.
>
>

There is plenty of valid information that is not in the docs. One might
just as well ask where did the policy come from that the docs are the
only authoritative source of information on policy. ;-)

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2007-04-24 14:41:24 Email signature in release announcement posting
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2007-04-24 13:45:15 Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0?

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2007-04-24 14:41:24 Email signature in release announcement posting
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2007-04-24 14:10:03 Re: [HACKERS] BUG #3244: problem with PREPARE