> > If we didn't do that, then Postgresql never would have been > > released in the first place, nor any date between then and now.
> I believe that the surprise is at the focus, when it comes to a release. > With commercial products (anyway) if you have any sort of show-stopper > bug (crashing, incorrect results, etc.) you do not release the tool Most companies / groups (opensource or otherwise) will not hold back many bugfixes and features for the sake of getting an additional out of the way fix in as it tends to piss off the majority of the users. I'm afraid right now I see this as a very minor item which is heavily broken, meaning it's really really important to very few users. Not having foreign keys break when renaming a column or table will probably affect more people and is awaiting the next release. Ditto for security enhancements. I see these as more important -- since they affect me :) If the changes are agreed upon and fixed, great. It's a better product because of it. But forcing others to use an older version with equivelently broken items because the next one doesn't do everything perfectly doesn't make for progress. However, rest assured, with anything if you push and put in the work require it'll eventually go where you want it to. -- Rod Taylor ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
