Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.132.154])
	by hub.org (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e9AFomJ37499
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:50:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9AFojB19202;
	Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:50:45 -0400 (EDT)
To: davidw@linuxcare.com (David N. Welton)
cc: "pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org" <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: TCL API 
In-reply-to: <871yxpezkf.fsf@eugene.prosa.it> 
References: <87pulborp1.fsf@eugene.prosa.it> <871yxpezkf.fsf@eugene.prosa.it>
Comments: In-reply-to davidw@linuxcare.com (David N. Welton)
	message dated "10 Oct 2000 12:54:40 +0200"
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:50:45 -0400
Message-ID: <19199.971193045@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Archive-Number: 200010/74
X-Sequence-Number: 1431

davidw@linuxcare.com (David N. Welton) writes:
>> So... how is the old Tcl API getting along?  Anyone going to do a
>> rewrite for 8.something-modern?

> Ok, let's rephrase this - does anyone mind if *I* hack on it some?  Is
> it likely someone will have time to review my changes and commit them?

Go for it!  I don't think the tcl code has anyone particularly caring
for it at the moment.  If you want to step up and fill the gap, more
power to you.

If you're thinking of API changes as opposed to just bug fixes, I'd
suggest posting proposals on pginterfaces before you go too far with
implementation.

			regards, tom lane