| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Version Numbering |
| Date: | 2010-08-20 18:42:15 |
| Message-ID: | DAD17919-BD5E-4771-8BC5-68F75458C0DA@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Aug 20, 2010, at 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
>> A while ago, I asked if .0 releases could be versioned with three
>> digits instead of two. That is, it would be "8.4.0" instead of "8.4".
>
> We've been doing that for some time, no? A quick look at the CVS
> history shows that 8.0.0 and up were tagged that way.
Ah, good for the final release.
>> This is to make the format consistent with maintenance releases ("8.4.1", etc.). I thought this was generally agreed upon, but maybe not, because I just went to build the latest 9.0 beta and saw that the version number is "9.0beta4".
>
> .0 is for releases, not betas. I see no need for an extra number in
> beta versions.
Again, it means the format would be consistent. Always three integers. Nice thing about Semantic Versions is that if you append any ASCII string to the third integer, it automatically means "less than that integer".
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-08-20 18:46:09 | Re: [Glue] Deadlock bug |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-20 18:40:03 | Re: Version Numbering |