Hi,
On Mon, 2016-05-09 at 08:53 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> The argument boils down to this:
>
> There is no technical reason to name it 10.0 so why would we?
The reasons have been discussed in all details in this thread. I won't repeat
them in here, but the list is big, as you know.
> Because it grants a larger advocacy opportunity and shows the amount of
> effort that went into 9.6Devel/10.0.
>
> There is every advocacy reason to name it 10.0 so why wouldn't we?
+technical reasons...
> Because it will potentially cheapen the value of moving to 11.0 unless
> we are predictably conservative about our release versioning process.
Oh, does it mean that in-core replication or Windows support or PITR also
cheapened our release versioning process? I don't think so.
Fedora and Firefox already got rid of this ego ;)
Cheers,
--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Principal Systems Engineer @ EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer
Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR
