> On Fri, 30 Oct 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > I have applied this. However, we normally prefer context diffs.
> > Fortunately, this patch had old and new rows, so it was almost the same
> > as a context diff.
>
> Sorry... I was in a bit of a hurry to get it out, and just grabbed
> the a patch I had made a while back. It was so small and only covered one
> file, I didn't think there would be much problem.
Yes, I am just a little paranoid this close to final release, November
1.
>
> > It also only dealt with the alpha locking code, which he stated was
> > clearly broken, so application seemed good. Some of your more agressive
> > patches may have to wait a week until 6.4 is released.
>
> By more aggressive patches, do you mean the optimizer and libpq++
> advice, or did I miss something? Also, by 'he' and 'you' who do you mean?
> I think you were speaking to more than one person, but I am not sure...
> Please clarify, thanks. :)
'he' and 'your' is you. By more agressive, I mean things that could
affect other platforms, were we can't get 100% agreement from the other
developers that this is a safe change.
Let's see what you find, and what other say. I don't want to apply
something at this point that is going to potentailly break another
platform, and the date/time routines have historically done this.
We can put them in a 6.4.* minor release, which I am sure we will have a
few weeks after the major.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026