Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> 
> Is this an appropriate commit for post-Beta?  Does it fix a critical bug 
> that will prevent a release from happening? :(

Well, I asked -hackers before committing, and there were no objections,
plus there were a couple of messages that weren't actual encouragements
but I took as sign of approval.

The patch itself is pretty innocuous.  I will keep an eye on the
buildfarm in case it causes any problems.  It doesn't fix a bug in Pg
proper, but it allows PL/php to build.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

• Re: pgsql: Rename the members of CommandDest enum so at 2005-11-03 17:17:33 from Marc G. Fournier

Responses

• Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Rename the members of CommandDest enum so at 2005-11-03 17:55:37 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: mark	Date: 2005-11-03 17:28:02
	Subject: Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data
Previous:	From: Peter Eisentraut	Date: 2005-11-03 17:24:01
	Subject: Re: Exclusive lock for database rename

pgsql-committers by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2005-11-03 17:34:03
	Subject: pgsql: Fix the recently-added code that eliminates unnecessary
Previous:	From: Marc G. Fournier	Date: 2005-11-03 17:17:33
	Subject: Re: pgsql: Rename the members of CommandDest enum so