Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Neil Conway wrote:
>> On Mon, 2007-02-07 at 23:13 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Er, was this on the agenda for 8.3?
>> Well, it seemed fairly harmless to me (no behavioral changes and very
>> little new code, just syntax), so I didn't see a compelling reason to
>> delay applying it for a few months. But I can revert it if you'd prefer.
> hmm so now we have ALTER VIEW/SEQUENCE commands that can do a bit but
> not all of what ALTER TABLE can do (renaming columns of a VIEW or
> changing the owner for example).
> I agree in principle that having those functionality in ALTER
> VIEW/SEQUENCE is a good idea but only bringing in a bit of the required
> functionality which still does not solve the "uhm why do I need ALTER
> TABLE to manipulate a VIEW" months after the feature freeze sounds a bit
> wrong to me :-(
What's bothering me here is failure to focus. We are not in development
mode today, and have not been for months. What we need to be doing is
wrapping up the patches that are already on the to-do list, not
expending developer effort on new stuff. Neil, according to
you have accepted two patches to review --- what is happening with
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?