Hi, > FWIW, I don't think that the phrasing of Peter's email is > disrespectful. As I read it, it simply states that the RMT has made a
As I said before, it might be a cultural difference. What I don't understand is, that a simple "Hi Michael, this is what the RMT decided:" would have been sufficient to make this email okay. I take offense in being addressed in third person only. > strongly that being a member of the RMT is a pretty thankless task, That I agree with. > On the substance of the issue, one question that I have reading over > this thread is whether there's really a bug here at all. It is being > represented (and I have not checked whether this is accurate) that > the > patch affects the behavior of DECLARE, PREPARE, and EXECUTE, but not > DESCRIBE, DEALLOCATE, DECLARE CURSOR .. FOR, or CREATE TABLE AS > EXECUTE. However, it also seems that it's not entirely clear what the > behavior ought to be in those cases, except perhaps for DESCRIBE. If > that's the case, maybe this doesn't really need to be an open item, > and maybe we don't therefore need to talk about whether it should be > reverted. Maybe it's just a feature that supports certain things now > and in the future, after due reflection, perhaps it will support > more. The way I see it we should commit the patch that makes more statements honor the new DECLARE STATEMENT feature. I don't think we can change anything for the worse by doing that. And other databases are not really strict about this either. > I would be interested in hearing your view, and that of others, on > whether this is really a bug at all. I think the question is more which version of the patch we commit as it does increase the functionality of ecpg. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
