On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:50 PM, David E. Wheeler <da...@justatheory.com> wrote: > On Feb 11, 2014, at 9:16 AM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: > >> I actually removed the .0 because there aren't supposed to be any >> schema changes in a point release (in fact, there aren't even supposed >> to be in anything but a major release). I thought I removed it from >> the filename as well, but clearly missed that in the end. > > I don't understand. I would think that versions should always be consistently > formatted.
Much as PostgreSQL only changes catalogs and on disk format in major releases, pgAgent only changes its schema in X releases (in the X.Y.Z numbering scheme). My point is that there is no need to have upgrade scripts from 3.3.0 - 3.4.0 or even 3.3 - 3.4 because there will never be any such changes, and using that numbering is likely to confuse users because the existence of a 3.4.0 script implies that there also should be one for 3.4.1 or 3.5.0 in the future, when in actual fact, there will only be one needed for 4(.x.x). Therefore, I believe the correct option is actually to have "pgagent--unpackaged--3.sql" and later "pgagent--3--4.sql" for upgrades. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
