On 12/27/2010 11:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> After a bit of experimentation, I can say that this is better than
> Andrew's hack, but it's still a good distance shy of something that
> should be automated or treated as a hard requirement.
I'm always happy if someone produces something better than I did :-)
On a more general point, it would be useful to have some infrastructure
for running quality checks like this and publishing the results. We
should be way beyond the point where we rely on individuals doing this
sort of stuff.
cheers
andrew
