The case for version number inflation
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | The case for version number inflation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 512E8EF8.3000507@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: The case for version number inflation
(Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@gmail.com>)
Re: The case for version number inflation (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) Re: The case for version number inflation ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) Re: The case for version number inflation (Selena Deckelmann <selena@chesnok.com>) Re: The case for version number inflation (Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>) Re: The case for version number inflation (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) Re: The case for version number inflation (Gavin Flower <GavinFlower@archidevsys.co.nz>) Re: The case for version number inflation (Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele.bartolini@2ndQuadrant.it>) Re: The case for version number inflation (Darren Duncan <darren@darrenduncan.net>) Re: The case for version number inflation (Susanne Ebrecht <susanne@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
Folks, I'm personally fond of our version numbering scheme; without it, we'd be on PostgreSQL version 23 now. It's old skool and like other infrastructure projects we admire, such as Linux, Apache, and FreeBSD. However, this weekend at SCALE I heard someone who has been using PostgreSQL for 10 years say "we've had nine major releases". And you're probably aware of the issue with Amazon Linux, where they don't distinguish between version 9.1 and 9.2 and thus corrupt people's databases. I'm beginning to think that no matter how much *I* like our version numbering scheme, it's hurting us with users because they see the last three releases as "version 9". One of PostgreSQL's best features is that we do a new major release every year, meaning that the database is improving greatly every year. To the vast majority of the population, our version numbering scheme doesn't tell that story. In other words: if we have to explain our version numbering to users all the time (and we do), then maybe we're doing it wrong. Further, many projects which used to use "regular" version numbers -- such as Firefox -- have now embraced inflationary version numbers. So, maybe it's time to just use the first digit. The next version would be 10.0, and the version in 2014 would be 11.0. As a counterargument, few other open source databases use inflationary version numbers, even the NoSQL ones. Discuss. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: