Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 10:30:18AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It's not the extra function that I object to so much as the library
>> version number bump. That's going to create problems for packagers.
> Ah, I didn't think far enough. Sorry, your definitely right on this one.
But is it OK to add a function to the library without bumping the
version? AFAICS all you have reverted is the version bump, so we could
have two versions of the library with the same version number, one with
the new function and one without - that seems somewhat undesirable.
Also, regardless of the safety or otherwise, isn't it our standard
practice not to change anything in stable releases except for bug fixes?
That's part of what makes Postgres so stable, in fact.
In response to
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2008-03-25 22:42:46|
|Subject: pgsql: Simplify and standardize conversions between TEXT datums and |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2008-03-25 20:18:18|
|Subject: pgsql: Done: > * -Avoid tuple some tuple copying in sort routines|