Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 5/16/17 18:14, pg...@postgresql.org wrote:
>> Tag refs/tags/REL_10_BETA1 was created.
> Was this change in naming pattern intentional?
Yes, it was. Andrew Dunstan suggested[1] during the
two-part-version-number discussion that we should start including a "_"
after REL in tag and branch names for v10 and later, so that those names
would sort correctly compared to the tag/branch names for earlier branches
(at least when using C locale). I believe his main concern was some logic
in the buildfarm, but it seems like a good idea in general.
When we get to v100, we'll need some other hack to make it work ...
but I plan to be safely dead by then.
BTW, I now remember having wondered[2] if we should make any other changes
in version-number formatting while we're at it, like maybe "10beta1"
should be "10.beta1". It's a bit late to have remembered it for beta1,
but is anyone hot to change anything else about these labels?
regards, tom lane
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/57364c11.4040...@dunslane.net
[2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20780.1463176901%40sss.pgh.pa.us
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
