The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> We have a list archive ... just to try and help out here, you
> might want to try posting URLs to show quotes ... to back things up ...
I don't have much success with the archive. (Search for "Proposed
Changes" - the name of the thread. It yields zero results). The links
to the result urls are coloured the same whether you have visited them
or not (not a bright idea), and in general I'm skeptical the searching
works properly. I certainly can't lay my hands on quite a few important
postings.
> Nope, my take on things is that your patch does things that would break
> existing functionality, which won't be permitted without one helluva
> good explanation ...
That is true that the ONLY aspect had controversy up front, but it
seemed to me to peter out as it was discussed and the patch was
submitted. The arguments in favour of ONLY seemed to be (a) It's what
SQL3 says, (b) It's what Informix does (c) Experience in usage suggests
that it significantly reduced programming errors. (d) The other
important point being that the patch includes a SET compatibility mode
so that old code needs only a 1 line change.
> This is just a post-7.0 merge and I was expecting
> > it put in CVS now that 7.0 is done.
>
> That won't happen ... v7.1, if you can get agreement, but not in the
> current CVS tree ...
We're post v7.0 now, so presumably we are in pre-7.1 land right? Surely
any minor patches now can be done in a branch? I can understand
reluctance to branch with heavy development in progress pre-7.0 but once
you've released it's time to move on.