Hey @marekventur -

I'm really sorry about taking so long on this. 😬 I've started a new job and was kinda going full blast on it and not saving anytime for OSS for a bit. Back now! 💃

I'll go ahead & merge that change into node-pg-types. Once that's integrated, want to bump your version you use of node-pg-types on your branch so the tests pass? I actually think it might be best to relax the versioning requirement for node-pg-types to just require a particular major version, letting the minor and patch versions increment naturally. When I'm using other people's modules I generally pin to the exact semver because I've been hit by breaking changes in minor and patch versions of other peoples modules, but since we control both node-postgres and node-pg-types we know we wont put breaking changes into a patch or minor version over there! How does that sound?

Actually since I kept you waiting so long I'll just merge this & do the rest myself! Sorry again for that.

Hi!

I hope you had a good start at your job! Sorry for keeping you waiting too, I was on holiday without good internet connection. Your idea looks good to me, mildly relaxing the version requirements for bits you control sounds sensible too. Since you've already done the merge there's nothing left for me to do, thanks :) Now I can update our app to the newest version of node-postgres and remove some dirty work-around code that's no longer necessary.

Marek

Awesome! Please lemme know if it doesn't work or you hit any snags! :)

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 6:09 AM, marekventur notifications@github.com
wrote:

Hi!

I hope you had a good start at your job! Sorry for keeping you waiting
too, I was on holiday without good internet connection. Your idea looks
good to me, mildly relaxing the version requirements for bits you control
sounds sensible too. Since you've already done the merge there's nothing
left for me to do, thanks :) Now I can update our app to the newest version
of node-postgres and remove some dirty work-around code that's no longer
necessary.

Marek

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#719 (comment).