Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 20:37:56 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Reports on obsolete Postgres versions
Message-ID: <20240312013756.GB1787866@nathanxps13>
References: <Ze9rnSQ4jAOpvF7k@momjian.us>
 <20240311211204.GA1786481@nathanxps13>
 <Ze902XsAC85dizNP@momjian.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Ze902XsAC85dizNP@momjian.us>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20240312013756.GB1787866%40nathanxps13>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 05:17:13PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 04:12:04PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> I've read that the use of the term "minor release" can be confusing.  While
>> the versioning page clearly describes what is eligible for a minor release,
>> not everyone reads it, so I suspect that many folks think there are new
>> features, etc. in minor releases.  I think a "minor release" of Postgres is
>> more similar to what other projects would call a "patch version."
> 
> Well, we do say:
> 
> 	While upgrading will always contain some level of risk, PostgreSQL
> 	minor releases fix only frequently-encountered bugs, security issues,
> 	and data corruption problems to reduce the risk associated with
> 	upgrading. For minor releases, the community considers not upgrading to
> 	be riskier than upgrading. 
> 
> but that is far down the page.  Do we need to improve this?

I think making that note more visible would certainly be an improvement.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com