On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> So I think we should solve these problems at a stroke, and save ourselves
> lots of breath in the future, by getting rid of the whole "major major"
> idea and going over to a two-part version numbering scheme. To be
> specific:
>
> * This year's major release will be 9.6.0, with minor updates 9.6.1,
> 9.6.2, etc. It's too late to do otherwise for this release cycle.
>
> * Next year's major release will be 10.0, with minor updates 10.1,
> 10.2, etc.
>
> * The year after, 11.0. Etc cetera.
>
> No confusion, no surprises, no debate ever again about what the next
> version number is.
>
> This is by no means a new idea, but I think its time has come.
Man, I hate version number inflation. I'm running Firefox 45.0.2, and
I think that's crazy. It hit 1.0 when were at aversion 7.4! Granted,
this wouldn't be that bad, but I have always thought that burning
through a first digit a few times a decade is much more sensible than
doing it every year. We just have to remember to bump the first digit
occasionally.
If we don't want to stick with the current practice of debating when
to bump the same digit, then let's agree that 10.0 will follow 9.6 and
after that we'll bump the first digit after X.4, as we did with 7.X
and 8.X.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company