-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
Tom Lane replied to Ron Mayer: >> Would postgres get considerably cleaner if a hypothetical 9.0 release >> skipped backward compatibility and removed anything that's only >> maintained for historical reasons? > > Yeah, and our user community would get a lot smaller too :-( > > Actually, I think any attempt to do that would result in a fork, > and a consequent splintering of the community. We can get away > with occasionally cleaning up individual problematic behaviors > (example: implicit casts to text), but any sort of all-at-once > breakage would result in a lot of people Just Saying No. That particular example is a very poor one for illustrating your point. You severely underestimate "get away with" for the implicit cast changes in 8.3. This was a really big deal for many, many users of Postgres, and continues to cause many problems to this day. I'm sure the casting changes broke more applications and prevented more people from upgrading than every thing on Ron's list for a clean 9.0 would. Not that I'm necessarily promoting his idea, but 8.3 was already a "all-at-once breakage" release. - -- Greg Sabino Mullane g...@turnstep.com End Point Corporation PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200910201005 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEAREDAAYFAkrdxBEACgkQvJuQZxSWSsgDigCfcEXFz/+4GvcNstAEYh05rkYR RJcAoICN46WCy1jLI9umMfGn5j9taqEt =9Iq7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
