Re: Let's get rid of the separate minor version numbers for shlibs

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Cc: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Let's get rid of the separate minor version numbers for shlibs
Date: 2016-08-15 20:36:06
Message-ID: 11ac2767-ac84-1da1-7c6e-75e44011e8e2@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 8/15/16 3:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> That would give us an automatic annual change in the minor version.
> If we ever made an incompatible change in a shlib, we could advance
> its SO_MAJOR_VERSION but keep this rule for the minor version (there's
> no law that says we have to reset the minor version when we do that).

Let's look into getting rid of the minor versions altogether. They
don't serve any technical purpose in most cases. Library packaging
policies have evolved quite a bit over the years; maybe there is some
guidance there to make this simpler.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2016-08-15 20:50:17 Re: multivariate statistics (v19)
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2016-08-15 20:35:34 Re: Anyone want to update our Windows timezone map?