Re: 7.0-> 7.1: any reasons for switching from {4,5,6}.0.x scheme?

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: 7.0-> 7.1: any reasons for switching from {4,5,6}.0.x scheme?
From: Игорь Пашев <pashev.igor@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:20:24 +0400
Message-id: <[🔎] CALL-Q8zboJsyFzYck27ZUA-PT1OnVwHkiVeds5ZE=WtmqUAi0A@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20130617160312.GJ22521@halon.org.uk>
References: <[🔎] CAOo+eVpHpYwhB5PwUFh9bQ0friUqcTDcdaqo+BQMCyd8whNW3g@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] 20130617111457.GG22521@halon.org.uk> <[🔎] 20130617151732.GD4608@msgid.df7cb.de> <[🔎] 20130617160312.GJ22521@halon.org.uk>

2013/6/17 Neil McGovern <neilm@debian.org>:
>> #712586
>>
>
> So... why is postgres relying on an undocumented numbering schema, and
> breaking when it doesn't match what it expects?


Why it checks for version at all? Isn't package dependencies should be used?

What about Debian derivatives?

Reply to:

References:
- 7.0-> 7.1: any reasons for switching from {4,5,6}.0.x scheme?
  - From: Praveen A <pravi.a@gmail.com>
- Re: 7.0-> 7.1: any reasons for switching from {4,5,6}.0.x scheme?
  - From: Neil McGovern <neil@halon.org.uk>
- Re: 7.0-> 7.1: any reasons for switching from {4,5,6}.0.x scheme?
  - From: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>
- Re: 7.0-> 7.1: any reasons for switching from {4,5,6}.0.x scheme?
  - From: Neil McGovern <neilm@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: RFH: two base wheezy bugs
Next by Date: Re: 7.0-> 7.1: any reasons for switching from {4,5,6}.0.x scheme?
Previous by thread: Re: 7.0-> 7.1: any reasons for switching from {4,5,6}.0.x scheme?
Next by thread: Re: 7.0-> 7.1: any reasons for switching from {4,5,6}.0.x scheme?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread