RE: [HACKERS] 6.6 release
От | Peter Mount |
---|---|
Тема | RE: [HACKERS] 6.6 release |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1B3D5E532D18D311861A00600865478C70BF68@exchange1.nt.maidstone.gov.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] 6.6 release
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I'm also confused. So far, I've been working on the premise that the next release would be 7.0 because of the probably major additions expected, and that I'm hitting the JDBC driver hard to get as much of the 2.0 spec complete as is possible. I think, if the other changes are going to be that long, the version for beta on Feb 1st should be 7.0, and have WAL (and others) for 8.0. Peter -- Peter Mount Enterprise Support Maidstone Borough Council Any views stated are my own, and not those of Maidstone Borough Council. -----Original Message----- From: The Hermit Hacker [mailto:scrappy@hub.org] Sent: Friday, December 10, 1999 7:09 AM To: Tom Lane Cc: Bruce Momjian; PostgreSQL-development Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 6.6 release [snipped toms comments] 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 :) 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? Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy Systems Administrator @ hub.org primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org ************
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: