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

Mon, 15 Oct 2001 12:42:06 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
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

>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


Tue, 16 Oct 2001 13:16:20 +0900
Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>
Re: Ready for Beta?