Re: 10.0

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Joshua D. Drake
Тема Re: 10.0
Дата
Msg-id 573734ED.7020004@commandprompt.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: 10.0  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: 10.0  (Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 05/14/2016 07:08 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> Any project that starts inflating its numbering scheme sends a message to
>>> users of the form, "hey, we've just been taken over by marketing people, and
>>> software quality will go down from now on."
>>
>> I don't think this is about version number inflation, but actually more
>> the opposite.  What you're calling the major number is really a marketing
>> number.  There is not a technical distinction between major releases where
>> we choose to bump the first number and those where we choose to bump the
>> second.  It's all about marketing.  So to me, merging those numbers would
>> be an anti-marketing move.  I think it's a good move: it would be more
>> honest and transparent about what the numbers mean, not less so.
>
> "Marketing" and "honesty" are not antonyms, and thinking that
> marketing is unimportant for the success of the project is not
> correct.

+1

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.



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: 10.0
Следующее
От: Joe Conway
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Losing memory references - SRF + SPI