| 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: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: /contrib/retep to gborg |
| Date: | 2002-10-19 03:33:48 |
| Message-ID: | 15292.1034998428@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I think we should move /contrib/retep to gborg. It is 400k and isn't
> anywhere near our core functionality. I will add to TODO:
> Move /contrib/retep to gborg
> Can I move this during beta? I don't think so.
Why not?
Feature addition during beta is frowned on, but I never heard anyone say
you couldn't remove features during beta. (In fact that's a pretty
standard response to serious bugs, no?)
Whether retep *should* be moved is not something I feel qualified to
comment on, but I don't put any stock in an argument that it can't
be done simply because we're in beta.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-19 03:42:33 | Re: Design decision curiosity |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-19 03:25:53 | Re: autocommit vs TRUNCATE et al |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-10-19 05:05:34 | Re: /contrib/retep to gborg |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-10-19 02:30:40 | /contrib/retep to gborg |