> On May 13, 2016, at 11:31 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Josh berkus wrote:
>> Anyway, can we come up with a consensus of some minimum changes it will
>> take to make the next version 10.0?
> I think the next version should be 10.0 no matter what changes we put
> in.


If I understand correctly, changing the micro version means that one or more
bugs have been fixed, but that the on-disk representation has not changed.  So
if I am running 9.3.2, I am at liberty to upgrade to 9.3.3 without a dump and

If the minor number has changed, new features have been added that require
a dump and restore.  As such, on 9.3.2, I would not be at liberty to upgrade to
9.4.0 without some extra effort.

A major number change should indicate that something even bigger than on-disk
compatibility has changed, such as a change that precludes even a dump and
restore from working, or that breaks network communication protocols, etc.

Any project that starts inflating its numbering scheme sends a message to
users of the form, "hey, we've just been taken over by marketing people, and
software quality will go down from now on."


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to