On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 11:02 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 17:50 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 06:15 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Again, I'm not planning to get rid of any existing capabilities > > > > > > > > Good > > > > > > > > > unless necessary. > > > > > > > > That is not a caveat I will accept, a priori. > > > > > > What does "accept" mean above? Are you the sole acceptor for this > > > feature? That is surprising to me. > > > > > > You can say you would vote against it but your wording above seems > > > overly controlling. > > > > I would hope my words carry the same weight as others when people speak > > of what can and cannot be included, when backed by reasonable and > > logical technical reasons. > > > > Some things are important, some not, and I've done my best to use words > > that indicate my views on that. > > I think you need to work on improving your word choice then.
I vote against this proposal. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
