Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 03:27:23PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > It is not real clear to me whether we need a major version bump, rather > > than a minor one. We *do* need to signal binary incompatibility. Who > > can clarify the rules here? > > One thing I wonder about: should the rules make any distinction between > API incompatibilities and client protocol incompatibilities? For the > former I would imagine one would like to have some "minor" version number > increase whenever features are added and a "major" number be incremented > when changes become incompatible. For the former, one would probably > want to have a similar rule but with a dichotomy between server-side > upgrades and client-side upgrades.
Yes, now that I remember, that was the big distinction. One requires a recompile, the other one doesn't even work with a newer db. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
