D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:19:51 -0500 (EST) > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > Yep, that is my analysis as well. If you want a pretty ReST-like > > output, that can be added later. > > Not if you use "border 3" for full ReST. I see nothing but pushback > later if you try to make "border 4" give less than "border 3." > > Anyway, we have gone around the circle again and are no further ahead. > As I see it, the original proposal was a logical extension to the border > settings, it was extremely low impact on the code and some people would > have found it useful. Unfortunately I made the tactical error of > mentioning ReST early on and now it won't be accepted unless it is 100% > ReST safe which it probably can never be and if it came close it would > give butt ugly output in cases where it didn't need to.
I don't think it would have been accepted as just a new output format because few people liked the new display --- they liked it only because it was like ReST (ah, but then you have to mention ReST). ;-) -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
