> As ever, we spent much energy on debating backwards compatibility
> rather than just solving the problem it posed, which is fairly easy
> to
> solve.
Well, IIRC, the debate was primarily of *your* making. Almost everyone else on the thread was fine with the original
patch,and it was nearly done for 9.2 before you stepped in. I can't find anyone else on that thread who thought that
backwardscompatibility was more important than fixing the API.
--Josh