Just my two cents... but I prefer option 1. 2005/10/6, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 10:57:33PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > >I don't get a vote - but I do want to suggest, as a user, that I get > > >generally annoyed with the presence of interfaces with names that > > >were chosen for historical reasons, but are maintained only for > > >compatibility, and either never did, or no longer apply. > > > > > >I'd rather you left it fixed. Returning it to the old name, for the > > >sake of process, and no other good reason, doesn't appeal to me. > > It's not just for the sake of process. It's because the pgAdmin guys, > who were the ones which invented the API and the users of it, are > already using it with this interface. Changing it means they take the > compatibility hit. However, I question how hard the compatibility hit > is -- for the return type, isn't it a matter of testing two possible > values instead of one? The naming case is harder, but how much? > > My vote is to not change them again. > > > >It is > > >a lesson learned. We move on. Enforce the process next time. Self > > >inflicted punishment is somewhat masochistic. :-) > > > > If we don't enforce the process this time, why would we enforce it next > > time? > > Because we will know better. > > -- > Alvaro Herrera Architect, http://www.EnterpriseDB.com > "La fuerza no está en los medios físicos > sino que reside en una voluntad indomable" (Gandhi) > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq >
-- Respectfully, Jonah H. Harris, Database Internals Architect EnterpriseDB Corporation http://www.enterprisedb.com/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings