Re: Version question
| От | Dave Cramer |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Version question |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CADK3HH+PjeJS8DDJwy6WJd-sFEUjJ7Y6j=yq3tA9GSO9Sr-=Gg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Version question (Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Version question
|
| Список | pgsql-jdbc |
My thoughts:
releasing 9.5 is the path of least resistance.
Ideally we announce that we are going to release version 42.x.y. however nobody will pay attention until their build breaks.
Then we will get a flood of messages implying that we broke their build.
My gut says to go with 42.x.y, my head says it will be easier to take the easy way out and release 9.5.x
On 14 March 2016 at 10:05, Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, what if we indeed release 9.5.x just to note that "it is at
least helloworld-compatible with backend 9.5"?
I guess as long as pgjdbc's versions are "close" to backend's
versions, users would be confused if those are compatible.
So it looks we either have to release pgjdbc 9.5.x, or release
something like 42.x.y
Any thoughts?
Vladimir
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: