On May 12, 2011, at 3:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I had somewhat intentionally not numbered them in the same format as the > main release numbers, because if we did that, people would expect them > to match the main release numbers.
Well, I think the fact that they're all 1.x managed to do that well enough. > I'm also still unwilling to make a core-code commitment to specific > requirements on extension version number format --- we've been around on > that multiple times already, and I don't think the arguments have > changed. It wouldn't be a commitment any more than using 1.0 was. I expect that either way they would be used consistently over time. > Having said that, I don't really care that much, except that it seems > a bit late in the release cycle to be changing this. People have > presumably already got installations that they hope to not have to > scratch and reload for 9.1 final. Would changing the versions from 1.0 to 1.0.0 really break anything for those folks? 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
