> > If we didn't do that, then Postgresql never would have been
> > released in the first place, nor any date between then and now.
> I believe that the surprise is at the focus, when it comes to a release.
> With commercial products (anyway) if you have any sort of show-stopper
> bug (crashing, incorrect results, etc.) you do not release the tool
Most companies / groups (opensource or otherwise) will not hold back
many bugfixes and features for the sake of getting an additional out of
the way fix in as it tends to piss off the majority of the users.
I'm afraid right now I see this as a very minor item which is heavily
broken, meaning it's really really important to very few users.
Not having foreign keys break when renaming a column or table will
probably affect more people and is awaiting the next release. Ditto for
security enhancements. I see these as more important -- since they
affect me :)
If the changes are agreed upon and fixed, great. It's a better product
because of it. But forcing others to use an older version with
equivelently broken items because the next one doesn't do everything
perfectly doesn't make for progress.
However, rest assured, with anything if you push and put in the work
require it'll eventually go where you want it to.
-- Rod Taylor
