On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 at 14:53, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Simon Riggs writes:
> > Minor doc patch to replace with latest RFC number
>
> Hmm, I'm a bit disinclined to claim compliance with a new RFC
> sight unseen. What were the changes?
I checked... so I should have mentioned this before
https://datat
On 2022-04-13 We 09:38, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Minor doc patch to replace with latest RFC number
>
> Intended for PG15
Idea is fine, but
- data, as specified in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159";>RFC
- 7159. Such data can also be stored as text, but
+ data, as specified in https://tools.
Simon Riggs writes:
> Minor doc patch to replace with latest RFC number
Hmm, I'm a bit disinclined to claim compliance with a new RFC
sight unseen. What were the changes?
regards, tom lane
Minor doc patch to replace with latest RFC number
Intended for PG15
--
Simon Riggshttp://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
json_docs_rfc8259.v1.patch
Description: Binary data
