| From: | Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reports on obsolete Postgres versions |
| Date: | 2024-03-13 18:47:00 |
| Message-ID: | 6434AF51-8430-4D1F-846E-14C2D675D687@ardentperf.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Mar 13, 2024, at 11:39 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com> writes:
>>> On 3/13/24 11:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Agreed, we would probably add confusion not reduce it if we were to
>>> change our longstanding nomenclature for this.
>
>> Before v10, the quarterly maintenance updates were unambiguously and
>> always called patch releases
>
> I think that's highly revisionist history. I've always called them
> minor releases, and I don't recall other people using different
> terminology. I believe the leadoff text on
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/
>
> is much older than when we switched from two-part major version
> numbers to one-part major version numbers.
Huh, that wasn’t what I expected. I only started (in depth) working with PG around 9.6 and I definitely thought of “6” as the minor version. This is an interesting mailing list thread.
-Jeremy
Sent from my TI-83
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2024-03-13 18:52:45 | Re: Reports on obsolete Postgres versions |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2024-03-13 18:43:12 | Re: clarify equalTupleDescs() |