On 05/09/2016 09:42 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
> > 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?
> >
> > Because it will potentially cheapen the value of moving to 11.0 unless
> > we are predictably conservative about our release versioning process.
>
>
> Are you saying it's 10.0 that has a special magic meaning, or just the
> bump of the super-major version number or whatever we call it?
>
> I'm not sure I buy that argument in general. There's *always* going to
> be a next release.
>
> And we already have a version numbering scheme that confuses people :)
>
I am saying that lesser mortals by default will think something is
cooler, hotter, more awesome than reality based on a large version jump.
It is a proven marketing method.
But see my earlier post about just wanting a decision. In short, could
-core or the release team review the thread, provide some leadership and
let us all get on with it?
Sincerely,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
