Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From David Fetter
Subject Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function
Date
Msg-id 20051009171946.GG24701@fetter.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function  ("Tony Marston" <tony@marston-home.demon.co.uk>)
Responses Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function
List pgsql-bugs
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 11:05:41AM +0100, Tony Marston wrote:
>
> > "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com> writes:
> > > And you might want to make it a project at http://pgfoundry.org
> > > so others can make use of it. You might also want to define it
> > > as accepting an array; I think that would allow you to accept
> > > any number of parameters.
> >
> > I think Tony is trying to avoid putting in any actual work ;-).
> > To me, the sanest change would be to modify his app to use the
> > SQL-standard syntax.  Which surely is supported by those other
> > databases too, no? And if not, why are *we* the ones getting the
> > bug report?
> >
> >             regards, tom lane
>
> You are getting this as a bug report for the simple reason that your
> website does not seem to have a method of accepting enhancement
> requests. That is why I specifically put ENHANCEMENT REQUEST in the
> description.

I've never seen somebody try so hard to get himself labeled as a
help-rejecting complainer before.  Are you *certain* that this is what
you want to do, Tony?

Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100   mobile: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #1937: Parts of information_schema only accessible to owner
Next
From: "Tony Marston"
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #1947: Enhancement Request - CONCAT() function