Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction
Date
Msg-id b61cbd7b86c9b18c8b6b871ab8000105218b3efa.camel@j-davis.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2023-04-21 at 16:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Maybe this means we are not ready to do ICU-by-default in v16.
> It certainly feels like there might be more here than we want to
> start designing post-feature-freeze.

I don't see how punting to the next release helps. If the CREATE
DATABASE syntax (and similar issues for createdb and initdb) in v15 is
just too confusing, and we can't find a remedy for v16, then we
probably won't find a remedy for v17 either.

Regards,
    Jeff Davis




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction
Next
From: Andrew Gierth
Date:
Subject: Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction