On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 19:49, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Dec 29, 2010, at 10:14 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>>> We can be held responsible for the packaging decisions if they use
>>> *our* "make install" commands, imho.
> So, as I see it there are two ways of doing it - install a
> catversion.h file and include it from libpq-fe.h, or modify the
> libpq-fe.h. I still think modifying libpq-fe.h is the better of these
> choices - but either of them would work. But is the catversion value
> really the best interface for the user? This is about libpq
> functionality level, which really has nothing to do with the backend
> catalog, does it?
It doesn't seem to me that a change of this type requires a catversion bump.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-01-02 12:41:58|
|Subject: Re: management of large patches|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-01-02 12:26:43|
|Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Basic foreign table support.|