Hi,
> FWIW, I don't think that the phrasing of Peter's email is
> disrespectful. As I read it, it simply states that the RMT has made a
As I said before, it might be a cultural difference. What I don't
understand is, that a simple "Hi Michael, this is what the RMT
decided:" would have been sufficient to make this email okay. I take
offense in being addressed in third person only.
> strongly that being a member of the RMT is a pretty thankless task,
That I agree with.
> On the substance of the issue, one question that I have reading over
> this thread is whether there's really a bug here at all. It is being
> represented (and I have not checked whether this is accurate) that
> the
> patch affects the behavior of DECLARE, PREPARE, and EXECUTE, but not
> DESCRIBE, DEALLOCATE, DECLARE CURSOR .. FOR, or CREATE TABLE AS
> EXECUTE. However, it also seems that it's not entirely clear what the
> behavior ought to be in those cases, except perhaps for DESCRIBE. If
> that's the case, maybe this doesn't really need to be an open item,
> and maybe we don't therefore need to talk about whether it should be
> reverted. Maybe it's just a feature that supports certain things now
> and in the future, after due reflection, perhaps it will support
> more.
The way I see it we should commit the patch that makes more statements
honor the new DECLARE STATEMENT feature. I don't think we can change
anything for the worse by doing that. And other databases are not
really strict about this either.
> I would be interested in hearing your view, and that of others, on
> whether this is really a bug at all.
I think the question is more which version of the patch we commit as it
does increase the functionality of ecpg.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De
Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
