On Friday, May 13, 2016, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us
> > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 12:05:34PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> > I imagine the bigger issue will be apps that have been written
> >> > assuming the first part of the version number is only a single digit.
> >> Let's just go with 2016 instead then.
> >> At least then users would see how old the version they're running is (I
> >> was just recently dealing with a 8.4 user...).
> > We tried, that, "Postgres95". ;-)
> Awesome: Postgres16 > Postgres95.
> That won't be confusing now will it? :-)
We'll just say you have to be using a special collation with 9.5.0 to get
the right sort order.. ;)
/me hides from Peter