Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion

Jorge,

Thanks for bringing this up again. We are going to go ahead with 42.x.x

Any chance you can work on the www site to explain what we are doing and
which version people should be using ?

Thanks

Dave Cramer

davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com
www.postgresintl.com

On 27 November 2016 at 09:49, Jorge Solórzano <jorsol(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 27 November 2016 at 08:40, Vladimir Sitnikov <
>> sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>> >I'm in favor of that. Even I, as a packager, almost fail all the times
>>> when I
>>> see "9.4" there.
>>>
>>> Glad to hear that.
>>>
>>> I think he did not get we aim for 42.0.0.
>>>
>>
>> I am to blame for that, I misrepresented this.
>>
>>
>>> 42.0.0 is greater than 9.4.1212 if compared with maven and/or OSGi rules.
>>>
>>> 4.2.0 would indeed be a problem, so the suggestion is 42.0.0
>>>
>>
>> OK, I'm going to post this to hackers with the proposal that we go to
>> 42.0.0
>>
>> I'm sure that will generate some comments.
>>
>>
>
> ​+1​
>
>
>