Re: Odd release numbers for development versions?

On Tue, 06 Jun 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
> Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> writes:
> > anon CVS and update as often as you need to.  There is absolutely no
> > need for a Linux-style release system with CVS.
> Seems like the main
> practical difference from the Linux release model is that we don't
> bother to make formal labeled/numbered tarballs of the development track
> until we are in beta-test cycle.  You want development track at other
> times, you just grab the latest sources.
> So far, the alternating development and betatest/bugfix cycle has worked
> really well for the needs of the Postgres project, so I don't think
> anyone is eager to change that approach.

With our use of CVS, there is no need for the split release, IOW.  We have a
similar, yet more open system here -- one I rather like.  Of course, if you
just read the website, you don't get that feeling -- it takes a year or so on
the list to really understand what this group is all about.  (No criticism
intended of the website, Vince -- it does its job nicely).

For the first two years of my use of PostgreSQL, the only information I had was
on the website -- boy, was I in for a pleasant surprise when I subscribed to
this list!

--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11