Re: Beta2 Wrap Up ...

-----Original Message-----
From: "Marc G. Fournier"<scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: 19/09/05 16:56:23
To: "Tom Lane"<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Marc G. Fournier"<scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Magnus Hagander"<mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, "Andreas Pflug"<pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, "Dave Page"<dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org"<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Beta2 Wrap Up ...

> +1 on reverting them back then ... and on
> a quick beta3 (ie. by end of week?)

+1 from me as well.

/D

-----Unmodified Original Message-----
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>> Is there a reason the old/new can't be aliaseed to each other, instead of
>> the old just being removed?
>
> Any change like that would require another initdb. If we were going to
> force another initdb, my vote would be to revert these functions to
> where they were in beta1. It was a mistake to change them in such a
> hurry.

+1 on reverting them back then ... and on a quick beta3 (ie. by end of
week?)

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664