| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0 |
| Date: | 2025-03-19 21:47:44 |
| Message-ID: | 1e1f69da35419af44bdd85d3e94cd44fa0d38ca5.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2025-03-19 at 14:33 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I strongly believe users want to control what happens, not have
> the system try to fix it for them automatically without their
> knowledge.
Do you have a sketch of what the ideal Unicode version management
experience might look like? Very high level, like "this is what happens
by default during an upgrade" and "this is how a user discovers that
that they might want to update Uniocde", etc.
What ways can/should we nudge users to update more quickly, if at all,
so that they are less likely to have problems with newly-assigned code
points?
And, if possible, how we might extend this user experience to libc or
ICU updates?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2025-03-19 22:02:57 | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |
| Previous Message | Marcos Pegoraro | 2025-03-19 21:30:40 | Re: Doc: Fixup misplaced filelist.sgml entities and add some commentary |