On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > ...
> > > Fix SIMILAR TO to be Posix compiant or remove it
> >
> > Sorry, was there a decision here?
> >
> > No one has described the problem, just declared that there is one and
> > declared that the feature should be removed.
> >
> > In the old days, one might have expected to approach this differently,
> > with a contribution to help fix a problem, after describing it. I'm not
> > quite understanding the current process, if there is one.
> >
>
> I had it in my mailbox as an unresolved issue. Peter wanted it added so
> I did it. I don't know the issue either. If you want it removed from
> open item, I will do that too.
Well, if nobody can identify what exactly the problem is, it should
definitely be removed from the Open Items list ... maybe we need to lay
down some 'rules' for the TODO list? Some sort of criteria other hten
"someone suggested it" to work with? For instance, change the TODO to a
pseudo-FAQ format ... where an item added to it has to have some sort of
'associated' description?
For instance, how is SIMILAR TO *not* Posix compliant? What *is* a Posix
compliant version? Where is such compliance defined? Is there a
reference?
Also, since when has 'lack of compliance' been basis to remove something
... "its not fully compliant, so even partial functionality isn't
allowed"?
Basically, there should be *some* basis for an item to be on the TODO list
... some sort "this is how it should be" ...
How many items on the TODO list are ones that nobody even knows what they
are about anymore? :)