Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

On Thu, 5 May 2005, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

>
>
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> I want them all in the same CVS basically to avoid any version skew
>>> issues. They should always have the same branches and the same tags
>>> as the core, for instance; and it seems hard to keep separate
>>> repositories in sync that closely.
>>>
>>
>> Can you have the same tags across different modules in the same CVS server?
>> If so, that would work.
>>
>
> I'm not sure you can tag more than one module at a time. But why would a
> different module be needed? We split the current single module into different
> tarballs, don't we?

Ya, but Tom is talking about totally self-contained, self-configured,
self-building "don't need the core source distribution in the least bit"
distributions ...

CVSROOT is all in the same place, and the source packages would all be
within the same directory as the core postgresql distribution ("one
central ftp directory"), but all that would be required to build one would
be that the libraries/headers are already installed on teh server in
question ...

>> If, as it currently appears, we'll end up moving in all of plphp, pljava,
>> plr, then we might as well be consistent and offer all procedural
>> languages, with the possible exception of plpgsql, exclusively as a
>> separate tarball, to be released exactly when a server release is done.
>>
>
> One per language, or just an "extra language" pack?

one per pl ... so if we were to include, say, pl/j and pl/java, in the
core CVS repository, they would be seperate modules, and seperate
distributions ...

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664