MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAM527d9HNDGS4wZBNK8vhRXtRX09i4UwKjvifUvSPS+P-i-1CQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACLU5mSnxYVf1ZkuZ4VuiREXA_42fe22+fR38y2_JJ6+WJQGyw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CACLU5mSnxYVf1ZkuZ4VuiREXA_42fe22+fR38y2_JJ6+WJQGyw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2026 14:45:43 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAMsGm5fPUwBxgY2RGGzpEp7Sjv7VMU28vcjN+RmuWQpTWM2uRA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Rename Postgres 19 to Postgres 26 (year-based)?
To: Kirk Wolak <wolakk@gmail.com>
Cc: Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik@postgres.ai>,
 pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000872a6206525852d6"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAMsGm5fPUwBxgY2RGGzpEp7Sjv7VMU28vcjN%2BRmuWQpTWM2uRA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--000000000000872a6206525852d6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Thu, 21 May 2026 at 13:44, Kirk Wolak <wolakk@gmail.com> wrote:


>   From my perspective, I like management asking "It's 2032...  Why are we
> on PG 28 still?"
>
>   The only question it raises is if it should be PG 2026?   because in
> about 1,000 years it could get confusing.
> And I know the PG crowd likes to think ahead...
>

I like this because it makes it very clear that there has been a change in
numbering scheme. Skipping 7 numbers could be due to almost anything, in
the long term, but no one will think PG2026 is just 2008 versions after
PG18. Also, I agree that while most likely no one on this list will be
worrying about this in 2100, it would be nice to know that nobody has to
worry about what comes after PG99.

--000000000000872a6206525852d6
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Thu, 21 May 2026 at 13:44, Kirk Wolak =
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:wolakk@gmail.com">wolakk@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>=
</div><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div>=C2=A0</div><bl=
ockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-lef=
t:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote"><div style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0)">=C2=A0 From my perspective=
, I like management asking &quot;It&#39;s 2032...=C2=A0 Why are we on PG 28=
 still?&quot;</div><div style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style=3D"=
color:rgb(0,0,0)">=C2=A0 The only question it raises is if it should be PG =
2026?=C2=A0 =C2=A0because in about 1,000 years it could get confusing.</div=
><div style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0)">And I know the PG crowd likes to think ahe=
ad...</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I like this because=
 it makes it very clear that there has been a change in numbering scheme. S=
kipping 7 numbers could be due to almost anything, in the long term, but no=
 one will think PG2026 is just 2008 versions after PG18. Also, I agree that=
 while most likely no one on this list will be worrying about this in 2100,=
 it would be nice to know that nobody has to worry about what comes after P=
G99.</div></div></div>

--000000000000872a6206525852d6--