On 05/09/2016 07:47 PM, Darren Duncan wrote:
> By the way, don't get me wrong. If we stick to 9.6 for the current
> release I'm perfectly happy with that, and would even prefer it for
> aesthetics reasons, as AFAIK we never got to a .6 before. The more
> general principle of just going 10,11,12 etc can start the next time,
> mainly to avoid ever having the kind of needless bike-shedding in this
> discussion. -- Darren Duncan
If we used the above versioning scheme we would be releasing: 24
(assuming we started at 1 instead of Pg95). I am not interested in an
Emacs or Fedora release scheme.
Also, if you think that moving to that scheme will change anything you
are wrong. It will just introduce different problems. The argument we
are having now is a once every couple to several year argument based on
pending significant features. If we had it for every release perhaps
there is a problem to fix but we don't.
The only flat rule solution I can see that might be reasonable was the
suggestion that no major release be > .5 but even then, why?
Sincerely,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.