schabi at logix-tt.com
Thu Nov 24 10:42:23 PST 2005
strk at refractions.net wrote:
> I think you're right about nobody using it, but we might have
> the other problem: people willing to use it in future versions
> not able to cope with old and new shp2pgsql revisions.
> I was thinking about something like a SHP2PGSQL_RET1ONSUCCESS
> The name is ugly, but the point is makeing applications
> able to define it to get a consistent behaviour between
> shp2pgql revisions:
> - old revision will not use the variable
> - new revision will use it sticking to old return codes
So they can degrade the new versions to the old, useless behaviour, but
IMHO this does not give them anything.
Either they rely on the new version with correct, meaningful return
values, or they ignore the return value altogether.
More information about the postgis-devel