Re: Version Numbering -- The great debate

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Version Numbering -- The great debate
Date: 2004-08-01 22:47:46
Message-ID: 5585.1091400466@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
> I think that the set of new features here will fairly likely warrant
> the "8.0" moniker; the 'consistent' way to go would be to call this
> version 7.5, and then 8.0 would soon follow, and be the release where
> some degree of improved "maturity" has been achieved for:

Huh? That is exactly counter to most people's expectations about
version numbering. N.0 is the unstable release, N.1 is the one
with some bugs shaken out. If we release a 7.5 people will expect
it to be less buggy than 7.4, and I'm not sure we can promise that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2004-08-01 23:09:30 Re: missing link on ftp
Previous Message Gaetano Mendola 2004-08-01 22:46:03 missing link on ftp