Re: 9.6 -> 10.0

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Josh berkus
Тема Re: 9.6 -> 10.0
Дата
Msg-id 57310E02.4090904@agliodbs.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на 9.6 -> 10.0  (Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@gunduz.org>)
Ответы Re: 9.6 -> 10.0  (Darren Duncan <darren@darrenduncan.net>)
Список pgsql-advocacy
On 05/09/2016 03:18 PM, Darren Duncan wrote:
> Loosely speaking, have at least MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH.MATURITY components,
> optionally more.  MAJOR must be increased when a backwards-compatibility
> break is made of any kind (such as removing a feature), otherwise MINOR
> must be increased for any forwards-compatibility break (such as adding a
> feature), otherwise PATCH must be increased for changes that shouldn't
> break any kind of compatibility, except for fixing bugs or security
> holes where the old behavior was not being relied on for any working
> uses.  MATURITY means eg alpha/beta/rc/production etc.

That seems like that would be an argument against 10.0?  Since we didn't
break backwards compat?

--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)


В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Darren Duncan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: 9.6 -> 10.0
Следующее
От: Petr Jelinek
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: status/timeline of pglogical?