Re: specificity of claims (was: SEPostgres - on track?for 8.4?)

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: specificity of claims (was: SEPostgres - on track?for 8.4?)
Date: 2008-10-24 17:44:18
Message-ID: 20081024174417.GF5539@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:35:13AM -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
>
> I did no such thing. I simply asked if anyone was looking into
> it. There is no suggestion for anyone to go and do it if not, I just
> wanted to know if anyone was currently doing it... maybe I wanted to
> tell them to stop.

Ok, glad to have that cleared up. In the original context, this is
what I saw:

---snip---
>
> Current status of SEPostgres patch: hopeful, but not assured.
>

Someone mentioned to me that IBM and Oracle have several patents in this area,
is anyone looking into that angle?
---snip---

In my ideolect, responding to "status of patch" with "there's this
other issue, is anyone looking into it?" connotes (but does not, of
course, denote) that the speaker thinks someone _should_ look into
it. I appreciate that perhaps in your ideolect that connotation is
not present, and my apologies for misunderstanding you.

Best,

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron Mayer 2008-10-25 03:49:25 Re: specificity of claims
Previous Message Melanie 2008-10-24 15:41:38 Re: specificity of claims