Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue

From: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>
To: Steve Howe <howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue
Date: 2002-09-09 17:55:18
Message-ID: 1031594119.268.67.camel@jester
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> existed, had a brief discussion on the subject, and couldn't reach an
> agreement. That's ok for me, I understand... but releasing versions
> known to be broken is something I can't understand.
-9' the postmaster

If we didn't do that, then Postgresql never would have been released in
the first place, nor any date between then and now.

There has been, and currently is a ton of known broken, wonky, or
incomplete stuff -- but it's felt that the current version has a lot
more to offer than the previous version, so it's being released.

This works for *all* software. If you never release, nothing gets
better.

I suspect it'll be several more major releases before we begin to
consider it approaching completely functional.

--
Rod Taylor

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2002-09-09 18:15:29 Re: Rule updates and PQcmdstatus() issue
Previous Message scott.marlowe 2002-09-09 17:46:00 Re: Script to compute random page cost