pg.ddx.io  pgsql-docs@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>
Cc: pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: A user report of misinterpretation of 'unsupported versions'
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 13:34:05 -0400
Message-ID: <20130802173405.GC14543@momjian.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABUevEz6tBYOtSVpOU+HiaAgbGqMk==CAVAZijkB0++v3S794w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAZKuFa857Jz59ZhCVfhsnUn1GFKqdJEpGbN+onSMHm+j5O33Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABUevExdEvJ4LUuDQQNOnSTVu=7i6E+77xhegf5kbRbr6Gb6VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAZKuFbOFO3WN0M-mhunWW0XX__rwyoAsKi_LPVjAD6LTyXaLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1211.1373676247@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAAZKuFbyaYLNz1r2wVF2De8cDCY1Dc6w3WhqfVR9kME5EHkQ6g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABUevEzpxwJoNGUQPvyAv__pAwq02Lufh0wW+1SoFQhd8NjFhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<16495.1373818963@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CABUevEz6tBYOtSVpOU+HiaAgbGqMk==CAVAZijkB0++v3S794w@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-docs>

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:51:13AM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> >> So maybe a cross with Peters suggestoin whereby we somehow split it
> >> into 3 groups - one that has supported versions, one that has
> >> unsupported, and one that has development (which now would be devel
> >> and 9.3).
> >
> >> Might that be even better?
> >
> > Seems a bit verbose to me, but then again, I'm not one of the people
> > who is confused.
> >
> > In any case, if we do change the wording, I'd like to lobby again
> > for using "obsolete" rather than "unsupported" for EOL versions.
> > That seems less likely to be misinterpreted.
> 
> Obsolete would work fine for me from a wording perspective, but it's a
> term I believe we don't use anywhere else. We are talking about
> supported and EOL, but not obsolete. But if it makes things more
> clear, it wouldn't be bad to invent a new term...

The problem with "obsolete" is that, in some way, 9.2 makes 9.1
obsolete, particularly when 9.2 greatly improves features 9.1 had.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +


-- 
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs



view thread (20+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <20130802173405.GC14543@momjian.us>
Permalink:  ../20130802173405.GC14543@momjian.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/20130802173405.GC14543@momjian.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
  Cc: bruce@momjian.us, magnus@hagander.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, daniel@heroku.com
  Subject: Re: A user report of misinterpretation of 'unsupported versions'
  In-Reply-To: <20130802173405.GC14543@momjian.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox