On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 7:47 PM Jeremy Schneider <schnei...@ardentperf.com> wrote:
> > > On Mar 13, 2024, at 11:39 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > > Jeremy Schneider <schnei...@ardentperf.com> writes: > >>> On 3/13/24 11:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> Agreed, we would probably add confusion not reduce it if we were to > >>> change our longstanding nomenclature for this. > > > >> Before v10, the quarterly maintenance updates were unambiguously and > >> always called patch releases > > > > I think that's highly revisionist history. I've always called them > > minor releases, and I don't recall other people using different > > terminology. I believe the leadoff text on > > > > https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/ > > > > is much older than when we switched from two-part major version > > numbers to one-part major version numbers. > > Huh, that wasn’t what I expected. I only started (in depth) working with > PG around 9.6 and I definitely thought of “6” as the minor version. This is > an interesting mailing list thread. > That common misunderstanding was, in fact, one of the reasons to go to two-part version numbers instead of 3. Because people did not realize that the full 9.6 digit was the major version, and thus what was maintained and such. -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
