Re: 10.0

Michael Banck <mbanck@debian.org>

From: Michael Banck <mbanck@debian.org>

To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>

Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, David Fetter <david@fetter.org>, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Date: 2016-05-14T07:52:14Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 08:55:20PM -0400, David G. Johnston wrote:
> The opinion seems to be that major.0 is some kind of magic incantation in
> the broader world of users...

From my reading of the thread, while certainly that is the general
definition of a .0, having infrequent .0 releases is not very practical
for PostgreSQL because the major versions are not that different from
each other and all are treated the same development-wise. So it would be
a huge drain on the project to discuss which major version should be a
.0 unless planning towards them steps up significantly.

So I think the (slight) consensus is more that all major versions are
mostly equal and hence only one version number is needed.

Michael