I don´t have any problem with PostgreSQL version numbering, to the contrary. The only thing I didn´t like was Postgres95, but I didn´t use Pg then. But since then it´s _consistent_ and I really appreciate that. I could live with, say, version 9.12.0 in a dozend years. I accept the alpha, beta or RC extensions.
I don´t like the M$ way: Why is WinWord 2 followed by WinWord 7? Why sometimes a number, then a name like Win98 followed by ME. Marketing? What´s the next idea of their marketing departmenr? May be Windows Baobao because the chinese market is really important? I don´t want to compare me or my users with yours. Most of my users know exactly one thing about the data base: When it´s NOT working. That´s all they care for. Working, not numbering. My users are all small and mid size enterprises, with less than 150 employees. They are just users and hire me as generalist, as developer, administrator, DBA, hot line and the one to cope with their inability to RTFM in one person. Usually they are satisfied PostgreSQL users without knowing what it is or what it does. It´s just - sorry for that - somewhere in the background. Like my MTA, which is.... ehem... duh, have to look for. Wolfgang
