Re: Just for fun: Postgres 20?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Just for fun: Postgres 20? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13766.1581725936@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Just for fun: Postgres 20? (Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Just for fun: Postgres 20?
Re: Just for fun: Postgres 20? Re: Just for fun: Postgres 20? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > I also object because 20 is *my* unlucky number ... Not sure how serious Andrew is being here, but it does open up an important point: there are varying opinions on which numbers are unlucky. The idea that 13 is unlucky is Western, and maybe even only common in English-speaking countries. In Asia, numbers containing the digit 4 are considered unlucky [1], and there are probably other rules in other cultures. If we establish a precedent that we'll skip release numbers for non-technical reasons, I'm afraid we'll be right back in the mess we sought to avoid, whereby nearly every year we had an argument about what the next release number would be. So let's not go there. regards, tom lane [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraphobia
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: