> > On 22.05.26 08:54, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I don't like either version of this proposal, because I fear it > >> puts way too much faith in our ability to adhere to a fixed release > >> calendar. What happens if "v2027" slips into 2028? Are we then > >> unable to resume the normal schedule for the following release? >
> A different angle came up in the AI-focused unconference session at > PGConf.dev: somebody speculated that use of AI might accelerate our > development cycle to the point where it'd be sensible to have two > major releases per year. > Not only these points, but if a release occurs in December, the version will seem outdated once the new year arrives in ~31 days. Users or enterprises will feel compelled, or pressured, to upgrade because the name will appear ancient to their clients if they are using v2025, for example. -1 on using the year. -- Best, Phil Alger EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
