On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 05:26:03PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Shouldn't this commit have removed the 1.0 file from git altogether?
> >> It's quite useless if it's not going to get installed.
> > I left it for the possible documentation value thereof.
> We do not keep around dead code in HEAD for historical reference
> purposes. We have an SCM for that, and we should use it. The only
> reason to keep this file would be if people were possibly still going to
> install 1.0 in preference to 1.1 ... but this commit eliminated the
> possibility of users doing so.
Would someone please do the above --- I am unclear exactly what files
need to be removed, and any Makefile adjustments.
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
In response to
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2012-08-28 02:36:51|
|Subject: pgsql: Document how to create advisory lock "bigint" values in SQL.|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-08-28 00:54:12|
|Subject: pgsql: Improve a couple of 9.2 release note entries.|