Re: [HACKERS] vacuum process size

The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> Okay, you lost me on this one...why is it inefficient to tag the tree on
> the date of a release vs trying to remember that date? *raised eyebrow*
> In fact, vs trying to remember the exact date *and* time of a release?

Because you make an entry "REL6_5 => something or other" in *every*
*single* *file* of the CVS tree.  It'd be more logical to store
"REL6_5 => 25 Aug 1999 11:55:32 -0300 (ADT)", or some such, in one
place.  Dunno why the CVS people didn't think of that.

Inefficient though it be, I agree it's better than trying to remember
the release timestamps manually.

I'd suggest, though, that from here on out we use the short strings
like "REL6_6" for the branches, since people have much more need to
refer to the branches than specific release points.  Tags for releases
could maybe be called "REL6_6_0", "REL6_6_1", etc.
        regards, tom lane