Re: Built-in CTYPE provider

From: Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
Cc: Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Built-in CTYPE provider
Date: 2024-07-24 15:44:42
Message-ID: CA+fnDAZc0nmwgF5OTn3UrMtjQevj=egCpwqyWS0-OdCSLB_LXQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 9:27 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
wrote:

> > The last vote arrived 6 days ago. So far, we have votes from Jeff,
> Noah, Tom,
> > Daniel, and Laurenz. I'll keep the voting open for another 24 hours
> from now
> > or 36 hours after the last vote, whichever comes last. If that schedule
> is
> > too compressed for anyone, do share.
>
> My opinion is that it is okay to release as is.

Like Jeff, I don’t think counting votes or putting names on one side or
another is the best way to decide things. Everyone has unique opinions and
nuances, it’s not like there’s two groups that all agree together on
everything and disagree with the other group. I don’t want my name put on a
list this way; there are some places where I agree and some places where I
disagree with most people 🙂

I don’t know the code as intimately as some others on the lists, but I’m
not aware of any one-way doors that would create major difficulties for
future v18+ ideas being discussed

fwiw, I don’t want to pull this feature out of v17, I think it’s okay to
release it

-Jeremy

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2024-07-24 15:49:28 Re: tests fail on windows with default git settings
Previous Message Tom Lane 2024-07-24 15:43:43 Re: Slow catchup of 2PC (twophase) transactions on replica in LR