Re: The case for version number inflation

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Bruce Momjian
Тема Re: The case for version number inflation
Дата
Msg-id 20130311023404.GC25655@momjian.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: The case for version number inflation  (Darren Duncan <darren@darrenduncan.net>)
Список pgsql-advocacy
On Fri, Mar  1, 2013 at 11:56:44PM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
> On 2013.03.01 10:19 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >7.0 was because Postgres became crash-safe, and stopped crashing routinely.
>
> Resilience to crashes by design is certainly a major feature when
> you didn't have it before, and worthy of the 7.
>
> So why doesn't
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/release-7-0.html make any
> mention of this?
>
> You'd think the major reason for the release naming would be
> highlighted at the top of that page.

6.5 was the big release that should have been 7.0 because of crash
safety.  8.0 and 9.0 were properly numbered based on feature additions.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +


В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Thom Brown
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Call for Google Summer of Code mentors, admins
Следующее
От: Chris Travers
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: The case for version number inflation