Received: from localhost (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.204.191])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B3199FB60C;
	Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:27:19 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 23874-09; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:27:15 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from svr2.hagander.net (svr2.hagander.net [88.198.128.226])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BD5C9FB485;
	Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:27:15 -0300 (ADT)
Received: by svr2.hagander.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id AE679DCC7CE; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:27:08 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:27:08 +0200
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org>
Cc: Andrew Hammond <andrew.george.hammond@gmail.com>,
	CAJ CAJ <pguser@gmail.com>, pgsql-general@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-www <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] programmatic way to fetch latest release for a given
	major.minor version
Message-ID: <20070410122708.GB25739@svr2.hagander.net>
References: <1176155240.221125.319880@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
	<467669b30704091526v79ae044boe7217cc0777dce1f@mail.gmail.com>
	<5a0a9d6f0704091534i4e4af90co2dad0e9e0b60efee@mail.gmail.com>
	<461B3E6A.8080007@postgresql.org>
	<20070410081558.GB24976@svr2.hagander.net>
	<461B5064.8010004@postgresql.org>
	<20070410101852.GC24976@svr2.hagander.net>
	<461B6F10.3040800@postgresql.org>
	<20070410111509.GF24976@svr2.hagander.net>
	<461B768A.8070402@postgresql.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <461B768A.8070402@postgresql.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200704/24
X-Sequence-Number: 11774

On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 12:35:38PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > Terminology aside, why? The unit is "8.1" not "8" and "1". It makes no
> > sense to say you're on version 8, in the given context, so why should the
> > XML data pretend there is?
> 
> Because serving the data in the decomposed format gives the consumer the
> maximum flexibility to do as they wish with the data. I find it hard to
> see why, as a relational database guy, you'd want to offer the data as
> "8.1", "8.1.3" etc. when you can just give the three parts separately
> and allow people to check whatever they need without having to chop up
> strings!
> 
> Imagine wanting to display only the details of the 8.x releases on a
> site for example. In your schema, you'd have to use a substring match on
> an attribute value to filter out 6.x and 7.x.

That is actually precisely my point. It makes *no sense* to filter based on
8.x. 8.0 is no more a major release than 7.4. And we'd encourage people to
do that.

//Magnus