Re: 8.0 Open Items - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Karel Zak
Subject Re: 8.0 Open Items
Date
Msg-id 20040823082055.GA17568@zf.jcu.cz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 8.0 Open Items  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 11:44:28PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> >>> * remove to_char(interval) if we initdb or mention removal
> >> 
> >> I vote just to mention it's removal at this time,
> 
> > Agreed.  Done.
> 
> While I don't care that much one way or the other --- what is the
> difference between this and the prior state?  Karel already said
> in the 7.4 docs that to_char(interval) would be removed in the next
> release.  Why would the people who ignored the warning last time
> believe it this time round?
> 
> I think that 8.0 is a more appropriate release number in which to be
> taking backwards-compatibility hits than 8.1.  So if we're gonna do
> it at all, I would vote for doing it now.
I  agree  with Tom. The  function  to_char(interval)  is useless,  bad,unsupported and without  future (if you want to
know why you can foundanswer in  lists archive). I think 8.0  is really better time  for somecleanups and back
compatibilitychanges than some other release.
 
BTW,  I'm  going to  start  fulltime  job  for  RH next  week. Note  RHconstitute new team of developers  in Czech
Republic.Maybe I will haveagain more time for PostgreSQL (or maybe  not if they assign me to someother project  -- but
PostgreSQL is my  wish :-) So  to_char() famillywill again better maintained.
 
   Karel 

-- Karel Zak  <zakkr@zf.jcu.cz>http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] ALTER SCHEMA ... SET TABLESPACE
Next
From: Eyinagho Newton
Date:
Subject: Re: Installing PostgreSQL in a Unix Platform