Re: New version numbering practices

Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 4 August 2016 at 02:15, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> So it seems like fixing libpq's parsing of server_version_num is
>> something we definitely want to fix ASAP in all back branches.

> Well, this seems like a good time to make server_version_num GUC_REPORT as
> well...

To what end?  Existing versions of libpq wouldn't know about it, and new
versions of libpq couldn't rely on it to get reported by older servers,
so it'd still be the path of least resistance to examine server_version.
        regards, tom lane