Ready for Beta?

Started by Bruce Momjianabout 24 years ago2 messages

pgman@candle.pha.pa.us

about 24 years ago

Are we ready to start beta on 7.2?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

t-ishii@sra.co.jp

about 24 years ago

In reply to: Bruce Momjian (#1)

Re: Ready for Beta?

Are we ready to start beta on 7.2?

For me, the only remaining issue is follwing. Since it seems there's
no objection, I will commit the changes in a few hours (I'm getting
ride on a train for a business trip. The train is coming...)
--
Tatsuo Ishii

Show quoted text

Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_client_encoding
From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>
To: phede-ml@islande.org
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 10:05:20 +0900
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.7 / Mule 4.1 (葵)

* Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp> [011014 16:05]:

ASCII SQL_ASCII
UTF-8 UNICODE UTF_8
MULE-INTERNAL MULE_INTERNAL
ISO-8859-1 LATIN1 ISO_8859_1
ISO-8859-2 LATIN2 ISO_8859_2
ISO-8859-3 LATIN3 ISO_8859_3
ISO-8859-4 LATIN4 ISO_8859_4
ISO-8859-5 ISO_8859_5
ISO-8859-6 ISO_8859_6
ISO-8859-7 ISO_8859_7
ISO-8859-8 ISO_8859_8
ISO-8859-9 LATIN5 ISO_8859_9
ISO-8859-10 ISO_8859_10 LATIN6
ISO-8859-13 ISO_8859_13 LATIN7
ISO-8859-14 ISO_8859_14 LATIN8
ISO-8859-15 ISO_8859_15 LATIN9
ISO-8859-16 ISO_8859_16

Why aren't you using LATINx for (some of) these as well?

If LATIN6 to 9 are well defined in the SQL or some other standards, I
would not object using them. I just don't have enough confidence.
For ISO-8859-5 to 8, and 16, I don't see well defined standards.

ISO-8859-16 *is* LATIN10, I just don't have the reference to prove it
(I can look for it, if you want to).

ISO-8859-5 to 8 aren't latin scripts. From memory, 5 is cyrillic, 6 is
arabic, 7 is greek, 8 is ??? (hebrew ?)...

So it would make sense to add LATIN10, still :)

If you were sure ISO-8859-16 == LATIN10, I could add it.

Ok, here is the modified encoding table (column1 is the standard name,
2 is our "official" name, and 3 is alias). If there's no objection, I
will change them.

ASCII SQL_ASCII
UTF-8 UNICODE UTF_8
MULE-INTERNAL MULE_INTERNAL
ISO-8859-1 LATIN1 ISO_8859_1
ISO-8859-2 LATIN2 ISO_8859_2
ISO-8859-3 LATIN3 ISO_8859_3
ISO-8859-4 LATIN4 ISO_8859_4
ISO-8859-5 ISO_8859_5
ISO-8859-6 ISO_8859_6
ISO-8859-7 ISO_8859_7
ISO-8859-8 ISO_8859_8
ISO-8859-9 LATIN5 ISO_8859_9
ISO-8859-10 LATIN6 ISO_8859_10
ISO-8859-13 LATIN7 ISO_8859_13
ISO-8859-14 LATIN8 ISO_8859_14
ISO-8859-15 LATIN9 ISO_8859_15
ISO-8859-16 LATIN10 ISO_8859_16