From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings |
Date: | 2010-02-03 21:35:43 |
Message-ID: | m2pr4mhuj4.fsf@hi-media.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> And that's just for the core code. I don't want to blindside driver
> writers and other third-party authors with a change like this made at
> the end of the cycle. If we do it at the beginning of the 9.1 devel
> cycle, no one will have room to argue that they didn't have adequate
> notice ... but they sure will be able to make that complaint if we
> do it now.
Well, in fact my impression is that the time third-party authors are
going to begin to look at things is not alpha1 but beta1. Because until
beta comes out you don't know what's in there. Some commits could get
reverted before entering beta is what is being said, the goal being to
be able to reach code stability in non-infinite time...
In my mind the fact that beta is meant to be about 2 to 3 months old is
for those problems to get solved before release. In short, I am the
blind driver who's not seeing what problem you're talking about.
Regards,
--
dim
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Erik Rijkers | 2010-02-03 21:39:52 | testing cvs HEAD - HS/SR - cannot stat |
Previous Message | Nathan Wagner | 2010-02-03 21:22:15 | Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings |