"Jim C. Nasby" <jim@nasby.net> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 05:19:47PM -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
>> Well, it is already included. The current proposal is simply to
>> improve the existing type. I guess you are arguing a different
>> proposal altogether - to remove the existing type.
> The existing type is depricated and has been since at least 8.1; so yes,
> it's slated for removal.
Well, my perception of that has always been "it needs to be upgraded or
removed". So if D'Arcy wants to work on the improvement angle, I have
no problem with him doing so. The thing we need to negotiate is "how
much improvement is needed to keep it in core".
regards, tom lane
