On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: > The current name causes constant confusion. It's a significant misnomer, and > leads people to distrust the code. There might be reasons not to change, but > you should at least recognize why the suggestion is being made.
Is it your position that contrib code is as well-vetted as core code? >> (And no, don't you dare breathe a word about git making that >> all automagically better. I have enough back-patching experience with >> git by now to be unimpressed; in fact, I notice that its rename-tracking >> feature falls over entirely when trying to back-patch further than 8.3. >> Apparently there's some hardwired limit on the number of files it can >> cope with.) > > That's very sad. Did you file a bug? It's intentional behavior. It gives up when there are too many differences to avoid being slow. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
