Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Tag refs/tags/REL_10_BETA1 was created
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Tag refs/tags/REL_10_BETA1 was created |
Дата | |
Msg-id | d57bf74c-4928-dc07-697a-1572487e83f9@2ndQuadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Tag refs/tags/REL_10_BETA1 was created (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Tag refs/tags/REL_10_BETA1 was created
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/16/2017 10:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On 5/16/17 18:14, pgsql@postgresql.org wrote: >>> Tag refs/tags/REL_10_BETA1 was created. >> Was this change in naming pattern intentional? > Yes, it was. Andrew Dunstan suggested[1] during the > two-part-version-number discussion that we should start including a "_" > after REL in tag and branch names for v10 and later, so that those names > would sort correctly compared to the tag/branch names for earlier branches > (at least when using C locale). I believe his main concern was some logic > in the buildfarm, but it seems like a good idea in general. > > When we get to v100, we'll need some other hack to make it work ... > but I plan to be safely dead by then. > Me too. Since posterity will be deprived of both of us let's note that the same hack will work, we'll just need two underscores. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: