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

Re: psql backslash consistency

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)surnet(dot)cl>,Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>,Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: psql backslash consistency
Date: 2005-05-28 16:51:23
Message-ID: 200505281251.23879.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
On Saturday 28 May 2005 11:12, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> > I'm not against the idea of a config variable, but this is what, the
> > third or fourth go around on this?  It seems rather unfair to put this
> > burden upon the current patch writer at this stage of the game...
>
> The fact that objections keep being raised should suggest to you that
> the idea is not uncontroversial.  I think it's necessary to look for a
> compromise that everyone can live with.  You're really wasting your
> breath to repeat the same arguments over and over and expect that
> anyone's mind will change.
>

I haven't heard a new objection yet that was discussed the previous several go 
arounds, and yet here we are adding yet another precondition...

-- 
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-05-28 17:03:52
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] patches for items from TODO list
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-05-28 16:03:38
Subject: Re: hash index work

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