Re: [HACKERS] 6.6 release
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] 6.6 release |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19471.944813176@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] 6.6 release (The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] 6.6 release
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes: >> 7.0 is still a long way away, so we ought to get the existing >> improvements out to our users. > Wait, now I'm confused...so between 6.6 and 7, we're talking another year > anyway? *raised eyebrow* Just curious about your 'long slog' above :) I hope not a year ... but I could easily believe we have three to six months of development ahead, if 7.0 is to contain all the stuff I mentioned. > Here's a question...should we beta on Feb 1st but make it 7.0? If we are > going to be looking for a "long slog" for 7, why not "freeze" things on > Feb 1st as v7, and start working on v8 with WAL, long tuples, etc, etc... > Like, what point do we call things a major release? In a sense, MVCC > probably should have been considered a large enough overhaul to warrant > 7.0, no? Maybe so. What's in a name, anyway? But I think we've established a precedent that it takes a really significant jump to bump the front number. If we didn't call MVCC 7.0, the stuff we currently have ready-to-go doesn't seem to justify it either. I think what we have in current sources is a nice maintenance update, or maybe a little more than that if Jan has a good chunk of foreign-key stuff working. It's worth getting it out to users --- but it doesn't feel like a "7.0" to me. OTOH, we've already changed the version ID in current sources, and changing it back might not be worth the trouble of arguing ;-) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: