Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion
| От | Dave Cramer |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CADK3HHLSb-unZPhSFgbQxjYf=b8TtNpwc3S+5Qp2OSgSyJcSbg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion (Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion
Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion |
| Список | pgsql-jdbc |
On 27 November 2016 at 08:40, Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com> wrote:
>I'm in favor of that. Even I, as a packager, almost fail all the times when Isee "9.4" there.Glad to hear that.I think he did not get we aim for 42.0.0.
I am to blame for that, I misrepresented this.
42.0.0 is greater than 9.4.1212 if compared with maven and/or OSGi rules.4.2.0 would indeed be a problem, so the suggestion is 42.0.0
OK, I'm going to post this to hackers with the proposal that we go to 42.0.0
I'm sure that will generate some comments.
Vladimir
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: