Re: 10.0

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:00 PM, David G. Johnston
> <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 10.x is the desired output.
>
> 10.x is the output that some people desire.  A significant number of
> people, including me, would prefer to stick with the current
> three-part versioning scheme, possibly with some change to the
> algorithm for bumping the first digit (e.g. every 5 years like
> clockwork).
>
> ​
​I was speaking for the project/community as a distinct entity and not
about any individual contributor.​  I'm acting as if we're past the point
of individual opinions and votes on the decision to go to a two-part
versioning scheme.

We will still welcome any major revelations that may have gone unconsidered
during the decision making but I find that to be unlikely.

David J.