Horton

Thread

  1. UNDER?

    Robert B. Easter <reaster@comptechnews.com> — 2001-01-11T14:20:47Z

    Is UNDER being stripped out for 7.1?  I'm looking at documentation and don't 
want to write about it if it won't be in there.

-- 
-------- Robert B. Easter  reaster@comptechnews.com ---------
-- CompTechNews Message Board http://www.comptechnews.com/ --
-- CompTechServ Tech Services http://www.comptechserv.com/ --
---------- http://www.comptechnews.com/~reaster/ ------------

  2. Re: UNDER?

    Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> — 2001-01-11T15:32:13Z

    > Is UNDER being stripped out for 7.1?  I'm looking at documentation and don't
> want to write about it if it won't be in there.

Already gone. Check the recent archives for the discussion...

                    - Thomas

  3. Re: UNDER?

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2001-01-11T15:45:54Z

    "Robert B. Easter" <reaster@comptechnews.com> writes:
> Is UNDER being stripped out for 7.1?

It's history.

			regards, tom lane

  4. Re: UNDER?

    Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> — 2001-01-11T17:10:11Z

    "Robert B. Easter" wrote:
> 
> Is UNDER being stripped out for 7.1?  I'm looking at documentation and don't
> want to write about it if it won't be in there.

Thats' how I understand the outcome of a discussion about 1 week ago
here: 

Tom Lane wrote on Tue Jan  2 20:19:18 2001:
> Anyway, we seem to have a clear consensus to pull the UNDER clause from
> the grammar and stick with INHERITS for 7.1.  I will take care of that
> in the next day or so.

------------------
Hannu