| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 10.0 |
| Date: | 2016-05-15 12:42:25 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEzCKNPaSWUguA5gkx8V_gppSz4dx2uyvmfkZjVwdZ1mEA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com>
wrote:
>
>
> On 14/05/16 20:02, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>
>> +1 for going with 10.0 after 9.6 and 11.0 afterwards, etc.
>>
>> It will hopefully both end these discussions and remove the confusion the
>> current versioning scheme has (I too heard way to many times about people
>> using postgres8 or postgres9).
>>
>
> Even worse: I've been told that a company was using "PostgreSQL 8.5"
> ^_^
That's not necessarily the version numbers fault. That's them using an
alpha version.. (Yes, I've run into a customer just a couple of years ago
that were still on 8.5 alpha)
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa | 2016-05-15 12:47:32 | Re: 10.0 |
| Previous Message | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa | 2016-05-15 12:29:45 | Re: 10.0 |