On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 11:31:24AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >The fact is, the existing system worked as it should, though it is often
> >invisible. We didn't get all the features we wanted, but that isn't
> >because the system isn't working.
>
> Thank you Bruce. That is good to know. Maybe the invisibility has led me
> astray. I'll shut up now and see if I can actually get Enums and some
> other good stuff done by this time next year. With any luck I won't be
> quite as derailed as I was last cycle.
>
> Also, I hope it's now clear at least that there are many people who want
> to see recursive queries.
Since some folks are waving the banner of 'open source software' around,
why do we have some kind of invisible process for following up on what
is and isn't being worked on? In this case, had it been mentioned
publicly that recursive queries were getting pushed aside due to
"perceived lack of user interest", people would have spoken out about it
early on enough that it probably could have made it into 8.2.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
