Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 564D41337B47;
	Mon,  4 Apr 2011 15:49:04 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 86397-04; Mon,  4 Apr 2011 18:48:54 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pv0-f174.google.com (mail-pv0-f174.google.com
	[74.125.83.174])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55F2D1337B43;
	Mon,  4 Apr 2011 15:48:53 -0300 (ADT)
Received: by pvg12 with SMTP id 12so1500368pvg.19
	for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 11:48:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
	:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=oGr4mIjNETjmdvAnN3egyVrjJwEisrbprnKh15Up6g8=;
	b=dqtwT49yo1g3roCrLuU5TvSJa0uaV0Vn9Feec8SFVg6/h+1XZNSnTpvUfBtvKy8r0P
	Sd1j20+5yhI7JLKDg4VTmZKVW/bX5e7uzHWsAxIMD6OOnbMKhmp19VV5zYubF4V1m/zC
	ny3R6ThHO/a//8GmzMsHX8cu3h2YTNtDaVzF8=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type;
	b=rSpkPr8cWLcgkNLXQDYZ3qIM+fsvot9HUyFlzlJdU2bwGqBvejvqNkjPZtltAg7beQ
	5e5fTLQ8oU/UJQFUyaySZdpgQUeUTx4PE9DBduzM/08rMi/kpNBPH7oBNCz+8DbNEMqr
	TYXypC6AOiFZR6B6cMrTAO9NNo4GNR2l765is=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.195.3 with SMTP id s3mr6602313wff.21.1301942932425; Mon,
	04 Apr 2011 11:48:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.62.65 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:48:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <3186.1301942527@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <4D998B49.8050000@2ndQuadrant.it>
	<BANLkTikwxtb9MU-Bn7XqCJSCEdEuJPL+Lg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D99F09D.3000606@2ndQuadrant.it> <1503.1301935044@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<4D99FF55.9070301@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<BANLkTinJjZY7CuFfLR1B0gJk9bnF1UdhBA@mail.gmail.com>
	<3186.1301942527@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 14:48:49 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=M5=Js_UkLc-P-5EFmkpiFk-Vyvg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Uppercase SGML entity declarations
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Susanne Ebrecht <susanne@2ndquadrant.com>,
	Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele.bartolini@2ndquadrant.it>,
	pgsql-docs@postgresql.org,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.899 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9,
	FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 201104/24
X-Sequence-Number: 6595

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> Even if that doesn't turn out to be the case, this is pretty harmless,
>> so maybe we should just apply it and move on.
>
> I have no great objection to the patch as such; just wondering what the
> roadmap is.

Me, too.

On a practical level, if we're going to do this, shouldn't we also do
!entity -> !ENTITY in Solution.pm?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company