From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: So where are we on the open commitfest? |
Date: | 2011-10-28 20:28:08 |
Message-ID: | 29334.1319833688@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>>> * unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
>>>
>>> This one also seems to be lacking consensus more than anything else.
>>> What do we do about that?
>> AFAIR, the only person objecting is Simon. I'm not necessarily saying
>> that means we should drive it in over his objections, but OTOH there
>> were quite a few people who spoke in favor of it and we shouldn't
>> ignore those voices either.
> The problem is, it will break tools. I was one of the people that
> supported Simon in his argument against. Not going to cause a huge stink
> but it is something to consider.
Yeah, but it's those same tools that will benefit from a cleaner
definition. Sometimes it doesn't pay to be slaves to backwards
compatibility.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-10-28 20:46:54 | Re: So where are we on the open commitfest? |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2011-10-28 20:22:01 | Re: fstat vs. lseek |