Jaime Casanova wrote: > On 12/10/05, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > This is what bothers me about having such an informal TODO list. There is > > a > > > danger that people will work in items only to have them shot down, which > > is > > > a great way to turn off developers. And there is also a danger that other > > > people will think that the todo item is likely to be accepted at some > > stage. > > > > I've complained to Bruce about that before --- there are a number of items > > on TODO that only one person thinks is a good idea. > > > > Perhaps some sort of [controversial] marker would be useful to warn > > people that the item needs more discussion before going off in a corner > > and trying to implement it. > > > > regards, tom lane > > > > Actually some items are marked with a '?' that shows that that item > needs discussion... although that it's not clearly stated in no where > in the TODO... > > Maybe be explicit about what the '?' mark means and mark every new > item with it until there is concensus a on it
Well, I would think a question mark would be pretty clear. The problem here is that no one objected to its addition to the TODO list, so it never got a "?". -- 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 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
