I am sorry I wasn't listening -- I may have helped by at least
answering the direct questions and by testing. I have, in fact,
positively tested both my and Oleg's code in the today's snapshot on a
number of linux and FreeBSD systems. I failed on this one:
SunOS typhoon 5.7 Generic_106541-10 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-1
on which configure didn't detect the absence of libz.so
I don't think my applications are affected by Oleg's changes. But I
understand the tension that occurred during the past few days and even
though I am now satisfied with the agreement you seem to have
achieved, I could have hardly influenced it in any reasonable way. I
am as sympathetic with the need for a smooth an solid code control as
I am with promoting great features (or, in this case, just keeping a
feature alive). So, if I were around at the time I was asked to vote,
I wouldn't know how. I usually find it difficult to take sides in
"Motherhood vs. Clean Air" debates. It is true that throwing a core
during a regression test does gives one a black eye. It is also true
that there are probably hundreds of possible users, ignorant of the
GiST, trying to invent surrogate solutions. As far as I am concerned,
I will be satisfied with whatever solution you arrive at. I am pleased
that in this neighborhood, reason prevails over faith.
--Gene