Have you heard? It's 8.0 ...

One issue is that we now have to update the PG_VERSION file in /data
(via configure.in) so we will be forcing an initdb when we make the
change.

Should we go ahead and make these changes now?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:

The recent discussion on -hackers was leaning strongly to the idea that
our upcoming release should be called 8.0 not 7.5, and after some
small private argument the core committee agrees. We have a number of
new features that warrant a major version bump (savepoints, PITR, native
Windows port --- IMHO any one of those would do it). What may be even
more to the point, we have enough internal changes in support of these
things that we cannot honestly say to the world that this release will
be more stable than the last one. Truth-in-advertising mandates that
we call this an N.0 release, not an N.5 release. There are people out
there who will avoid an N.0 release, and in all honesty we cannot tell
them they shouldn't avoid this one.

Accordingly, it's hereby decreed that PG-next will be PG 8.0.
[ now, where did I put that puff of white smoke? ]

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:

One issue is that we now have to update the PG_VERSION file in /data
(via configure.in) so we will be forcing an initdb when we make the
change.

I'll take care of it tomorrow ... we definitely want to deal with all
the known initdb-forcing reasons before we start beta ...

regards, tom lane