| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp |
| Cc: | michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: shift_sjis_2004 related autority files are remaining |
| Date: | 2017-06-23 18:52:50 |
| Message-ID: | d239da75-68de-72b6-f424-1a98578c7f88@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/23/17 11:15, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> For clarity, I personally perfer to keep all the source text file
>> in the repository, especially so that we can detect changes of
>> them. But since we decide that at least most of them not to be
>> there (from a reason of license), I just don't see a reason to
>> keep only the rest even without the restriction.
>
> So are you saying that if n/m of authority files are not kept because
> of license issue, then m-n authority files should not be kept as well?
> What's the benefit for us by doing so?
I don't have a clear opinion on this particular issue, but I think we
should have clarity on why particular files or code exist. So why do
these files exist and the others don't? Is it just the license?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-06-23 19:45:48 | Re: REPLICA IDENTITY FULL |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-06-23 18:47:06 | Re: Same expression more than once in partition key |