> > >> undocumented. Maybe instead of removing, change the text to be > >> "Deprecated, use the equivalent XXX operator instead." Or we could > >> add a footnote similar to what was there for a previous renaming: > > > The problem that this new <<| is equivalent to <^ only for points (To > > recap: the source of a problem is the same name of <^ operator for > points > > and boxes with different meaning for these types). > > I don't think it's that hard to be clear; see proposed wording below. > > The other loose end is that I don't think we can take away the opclass > entries for the old spellings, unless we're willing to visibly break > people's queries by removing those operator names altogether. That > doesn't seem like it'll fly when we haven't even deprecated the old > names yet. So for now, we have to support both names in the opclasses. > I extended the patch to do that. > > This version seems committable to me --- any thoughts? > The wording seems no problem to me. I looked into a patch and changes also seem sensible but I can not apply this patch because of really many rejects. Which commit should I use to apply it onto?
-- Best regards, Pavel Borisov Postgres Professional: http://postgrespro.com <http://www.postgrespro.com>
