Re: So, are we going to bump catversion for beta5, or not?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: So, are we going to bump catversion for beta5, or not?
Date: 2003-10-21 16:13:50
Message-ID: 3944.1066752830@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> We try to limit initdb in late betas --- that has always been our
> process. I don't have any problem with the initdb, though.

We now have another reason to, which is Chris K-L's point about
unqualified names in the various SQL-language built-in functions.
I am about to commit that fix (with another catversion bump for
good measure...)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2003-10-21 16:23:03 Re: So, are we going to bump catversion for beta5, or not?
Previous Message Yann Michel 2003-10-21 16:06:13 suspicius behaviour during delete