On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 7:07 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Perhaps we're honoring this more in the breech than in the observance, > but I'm not making up what Tom has said about this: > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/27310.1251410...@sss.pgh.pa.us > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/19174.1299782...@sss.pgh.pa.us > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3413.1301154...@sss.pgh.pa.us > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3261.1401915...@sss.pgh.pa.us
Of course, not doing a catversion bump after beta1 doesn't necessarily have much value in and of itself. *Promising* to not do a catversion bump, and then usually keeping that promise definitely has a certain value, but clearly we are incapable of that. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
