Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: more i18n/l10n issues

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,"Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>,"Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: more i18n/l10n issues
Date: 2003-09-29 14:47:09
Message-ID: 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B83AF261@mail.vale-housing.co.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us] 
> Sent: 29 September 2003 15:23
> To: Peter Eisentraut
> Cc: Dave Page; Alvaro Herrera; Hackers
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] more i18n/l10n issues 
> 
> 
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Dave Page writes:
> >> I find this a little worrying because if we want a feature 
> or tweak 
> >> for pgAdmin we usually have to fight tooth & nail to 
> justify getting 
> >> it committed (which is not a bad thing), however 'some guys at Red 
> >> Hat' are getting switches added to the postmaster without any 
> >> discussion?
> 
> > It was not a nice thing to do.
> 
> Gimme a break, guys.  There *was* discussion, eg here, 
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-06/msg01092.php
> and the patch was posted for review, see this thread: 
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-06/msg00420.php

My apologes - I was basing my comments on someone else's assertion that
there was no discussion.

Regards, Dave.

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hiroshi InoueDate: 2003-09-29 14:53:47
Subject: Re: pgsql-server/src/backend catalog/index.c comma ...
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-09-29 14:45:57
Subject: Re: 2-phase commit

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group