On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > > It was pretty clear that Thomas' original patch lost the vote, or > would have lost if we'd bothered to hold a formal vote.
Hasn't there just been a formal vote on this? > I don't > see anyone arguing against the notion of making XLOG location more > easily configurable --- it was just the notion of making it depend > on environment variables that scared people. And it's obvious it was centred on the use of an environment variable from the subject line, it's still got PGXLOG in capitals in it. -- Nigel J. Andrews ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
