On Aug 20, 2010, at 12:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

>> No, I mean 9.0.0beta4. If we were to adopt the Semantic Versioning spec, one 
>> would *always* use X.Y.Z, with optional ASCII characters appended to Z to 
>> add meaning (including "less than unadorned Z).
> 
> Well, I for one will fiercely resist adopting any such standard, because
> it's directly opposite to the way that RPM will sort such version numbers.

Which is how?

> Apparently whoever wrote "Semantic Versioning" didn't bother to inquire
> into existing practice.

Tom Preston-Warner of GitHub fame.

Best,

David


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

Reply via email to