Incompatibilities from one release to the next *has* to bump the major
version...a minor number should be a *minor* upgrade, plain and simple...
On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Marc, I'd like to understand why we are pushing 7.0 for this "release
> > where we are" release. We've (perhaps) got FK support, and a rewritten
> > psql, and lots of bug fixes, and maybe "join syntax" but not outer
> > joins. If we release as 7.0, then I'll force the date/time
> > reunification into this release, since it is a pretty big change to
> > the backend tables (I've been waiting quite a while already for the
> > major rev jump to do this).
>
> One issue is that while we all want WAL and new query structure and
> stuff like that, we don't have end users asking for this repeatedly.
> What we do have them asking for is foreign keys.
>
> The major issue seems to be that the 7.0 release is going to have major
> incompatibilities for prior releases in the area of date types, and
> stuff like that. With all we are doing, I am not sure that is even
> going to work because we can't synchonize all the incompatibility stuff
> for one release.
>
> Maybe we just call it 7.0, and have some more incompatibility stuff in
> 7.1. Seems waiting for some .0 release is not going to work, unless we
> scrap the Feb 1 beta and just wait for all new stuff to be finished, but
> that seems worse than having a 7.1 that contains some incompatiblities.
>
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
> maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
> + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
>
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org