Re: Version Numbering

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Jaime Casanova <jaime@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Look at other DBMSes:
>> Oracle: 8i, 9i, 10g, 11g
>> Informix 9, 10, 11
>> MS SQL Server 7, 2000, 2005, 2008
>>
>> note the lack of dotes (and even if they actually have dots, those are
>> minor versions).
>>
>
> So your proposal is that we name the next release of Postres 9i?
>

well, i'm not proposing anything... just showing that our numbering
scheme *is* confusing

>
> In any case those are all marketing brand names. The actual releases
> do in fact have real version numbers and no, they aren't all minor
> releases. Oracle 8i was 8.1.x which was indeed a major release over
> 8.0.
>

Maybe we can give marketing brand names to every new version so people
is not confused by numbers...

--
Jaime Casanova         www.2ndQuadrant.com
Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL