Message-ID: <3E6CE1F2.8030302@postgresql.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 05:35:22 +1030
From: Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
	rv:1.3b) Gecko/20030210
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
References: <19041.1047322279@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <19041.1047322279@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tom Lane wrote:
<snip>
> One way to tamp down expectations of client backwards compatibility
> would be to call the release 8.0 instead of 7.4 ;-)
> 
> Comments?

Actually, I've been thinking about the numbering of the next PostgreSQL 
version for a few days now.

The scenario that's appealing to me the most is this for the next release:

PostgreSQL 8.0
**************

+ Includes PITR and the Win32 port

+ Not sure where Satoshi is up to with his 2 phase commit proposal, but 
that might make sense to incorporate into a wire protocol revision. 
 From memory he received funding to work on it, so it might be coming 
along nicely.

+ Other things optional of course.


Personally, I'd rather we go for PostgreSQL 8.0, waiting a while extra 
for PITR and Win32 if needed, and also properly co-ordinate all of the 
release process information (website updates, package builds, Announce 
to the mailing lists and news sources).

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

-- 
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi