Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 15:18 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > ruby-postgres != plruby
> > Oops, sorry. I got confused. I also have not heard from the
> > ruby-postgres guy, but as a community we are less likely to have heard
> > from him because interfaces are more independent.
> I finally did reach the ruby-postgres guy. He said he would incorporate
> my patches.
> I'd like a real release (that becomes a gem), because the current ruby-
> postgres release is not sufficient (in a number of ways), and I got at
> least one response from someone who literally skipped PostgreSQL support
> in their app because of it:
> I expect there will be more patches also. Hopefully we can get this up
> to speed.
> I've been informed that the Ruby community's gem releases are heavily
> dependent on rubyforge. Without involvement of the rubyforge ruby-
> postgres project, releases would have to be under a different name
> (which would mean changing client code -- not desirable). This is my
> understanding, anyway.
Good, sounds like things are moving forward.
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
In response to
pgsql-interfaces by date
|Next:||From: imad||Date: 2007-01-26 20:21:21|
|Subject: Re: Query regarding PostgreSQL date/time binary format for libpq|
|Previous:||From: Jeff Davis||Date: 2007-01-25 22:10:45|
|Subject: Re: ruby-postgres module needs work, maintainer|