| From: | jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik(at)postgres(dot)ai> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kirk Wolak <wolakk(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rename Postgres 19 to Postgres 26 (year-based)? |
| Date: | 2026-05-25 23:28:06 |
| Message-ID: | CACJufxFY8g3tUM2SGa1p+oegZnyNtg6OLqmezzumkm0vsLiKvg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 6:22 AM Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik(at)postgres(dot)ai> wrote:
>
> The slip risk, the N+1 marketing-renumbering precedent, and the possibility that cadence may change (biannual or otherwise) -- all make sense.
>
> Year-tied version numbers don't fit. Let me propose something smaller that still addresses the underlying user problem — knowing at a glance how old a release is and when it goes EOL.
>
> I have another, much lighter proposal. In fact, two paths:
>
> 1) Docs. Add something like "Major version NN released YYYY, EOL Mon YYYY" explicitly on pages like:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/release/
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/index.html
>
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/
After "PDF Version", add another column makes sense to me.
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/release/
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/index.html
For these two links, I'm not entirely sure where the best place to put
that information would be.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-05-25 23:34:43 | Re: [BUG] CRASH: ECPGprepared_statement() and ECPGdeallocate_all() when connection is NULL |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-05-25 23:06:10 | Re: NULL pointer dereference in syslogger with load_libraries() and -DEXEC_BACKEND at startup |