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

Re: Removal of backward-compatibility docs mentions

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: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Removal of backward-compatibility docs mentions
Date: 2006-03-20 23:03:10
Message-ID: 200603202303.k2KN3Ak07589@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> > I don't think it's a net win to get rid of this text, as it describes
> > useful alternatives to the GUC variable:
> 
> I was about to object to some other parts of the patch on the same
> grounds, in particular the changes to ddl.sgml and maintenance.sgml,
> and the first change in xfunc.sgml.  In most of these cases,
> currently-useful information is intertwined with the reference to the
> old behavior.  If you can't be bothered to rewrite to preserve all of
> the information, then don't remove the text.

I am working on Neils suggestion.  I don't agree we need to preserve all
information about very old releases.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  SRA OSS, Inc.   http://www.sraoss.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2006-03-20 23:05:02
Subject: Re: Additional current timestamp values
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-03-20 23:02:06
Subject: Re: Additional current timestamp values

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