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]

Reply via email to