Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Troels Arvin <troels(at)arvin(dot)dk>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating
Date: 2004-10-15 16:53:01
Message-ID: 200410151653.i9FGr1G13296@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > There is only one current standard SQL:2003 correct? The rest are
> > considered deprecated?
>
> The old ones are certainly not "deprecated".
>
> Personally I find the newer versions to be suffering from uncontrolled
> feature bloat and committee-itis.

That was my feeling too. I know many cases the older specifications
were clearer.

Anyway, I think the new "There are three versions of the SQL standard"
wording is OK.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2004-10-18 01:10:24 Re: SQL 2003 conformance
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-10-15 16:51:04 Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating