On ons, 2012-06-20 at 13:26 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Marti Raudsepp <ma...@juffo.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> > > wrote: > >> (I do believe that using the v9.2.0beta marker is > >> *better*, because then it sorts properly. But likely not enough much > >> better to be inconsistent with previous versions) > > > > Good point. Maybe that's a reason to change the versioning scheme and > > stick with "9.2.0betaX" everywhere. Including calling the final > > release "9.2.0" instead of simply "9.2"? > > That might actually be a good idea. We can't really change the way we > named the betas, but it's not too late to consider naming the actual > release as 9.2.0...
The final release was always going to be called 9.2.0, but naming the beta 9.2.0betaX is wrong. There was a previous discussion about that particular point. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
