X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9964D1B4EC for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 05:08:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25403-07 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 02:08:11 -0300 (ADT) Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (momjian.navpoint.com [207.106.42.251]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDF10D1B4E3 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 02:08:09 -0300 (ADT) Received: (from pgman@localhost) by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h9M584f23271; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 01:08:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Momjian Message-Id: <200310220508.h9M584f23271@candle.pha.pa.us> Subject: Re: 7.4 compatibility question In-Reply-To: <1066797764.374.1.camel@tokyo> To: Neil Conway Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 01:08:04 -0400 (EDT) Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne , Tom Lane , PostgreSQL Hackers X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL108 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200310/1016 X-Sequence-Number: 45698 Neil Conway wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 00:41, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > > > It would be pretty strange to use those as a default --- I am not > > > inclined to mention it in the release notes --- we don't mention every > > > change, only significant ones. > > > > Personally, I think that's a fairly silly policy! > > I agree -- documenting possible areas of incompatibility is important, > and I would prefer that we err on the side of mentioning too much, > rather than too little. Docs updated to include 'today': 'now' will no longer work as a column default; now() or CURRENT_TIMESTAMP should be used instead 'today' will no longer work as a column default; CURRENT_DATE should be used instead As far as yesterday/tomorrow, I think anyone using that will realize that if 'today' doesn't work, those will not either. Sure, I like to be complete too, but at a certain point it becomes overload and people can't process it. Part of the reason the release notes are read is because they are _readable_, or as readable was we can make +300 changes. Do you think I include every user-visible change in the release notes? It would be 2-3x longer, and probably not more useful. -- 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