Tom Lane wrote:
> "Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> > 3) I was under the (apparantly incorrect?) impression that we wanted
> > this one up on win32 *now*, and then wanted to add it on other platforms
> > later.
>
> Well, that's an okay position if your time horizon is measured in days.
> But I would like to see us using that code on all platforms before 7.5
> feature freeze. It's silly to be carrying that code around and not
> using it, when we have constant problems with the C-library-based time
> zone code, plus big portability issues arising from inconsistency of
> time zone names across platforms. For example, for the first time we'd
> be able to actually document the set of time zone names accepted by
> SET TIMEZONE, and *reliably* detect whether a provided name is really
> legal.
>
> Frankly I would never have accepted this patch if I thought it were
> going to be a Windows-only hack; I would have held out for something a
> lot smaller. In my mind the principal reason for having it is not Win32
> at all, but solving the multi-platform problems we've always had with
> time zone handling.
It goes with the Win32 approach of doing as little as possible to the
Unix port. If the Unix folks want it, we can enable it, but the Win32
folks aren't going to force it on Unix until Unix wants it and has
tested it.
I am not going to give Win32 a bad name by breaking the CVS build for
everyone. You guys are very sensitive to Win32 mucking up the Unix
port, so this is what you get --- a Win32 port that makes the minimal
disruption to Unix.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073