Re: pgScript patch

Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> I think the Pros overweigh, so I'd like to see it there.
>>
>> If the isolation is still pretty good, there is no need for a large
>> number of "pgadmin developers" to get a learning curve to get over. And
>> the part in the query tool will need to be done that way *anyway*.
>>
>> The only "major" con is the upgrade one, but I think that's fairly
>> survivable.
>>
>> Since pgscript depends on all the wx stuff anyway, it's not feasible for
>> it to ever be included in the backend distribution, which is what I
>> would've liked even more (as a libpgscript thingy). I think bundling it
>> with pgadmin makes most sense in this case, both in a binary and source
>> perspective, the same way we do with pgAgent.
>
> pgAgent is a bad example as it's scheduled for removal from the core
> this release anyway. If we're going to bundle pgScript with pgAdmin,
> then I'd rather just integrate and be done with it. If we're going to
> keep it separate, then that should be because it truly is separate
> (can have it's own release schedule etc). Of course, that wouldn't
> mean it can't share pgAdmin resources such as SVN and the website etc.

Ok, bad example. But I think you misunderstood the part about
"isolation", if that's what you mean with the part about separate.

I mean, the vast majority of pgscript will not overlap with th vast
majority of pgadmin code. Thus, someone who's "just working on the
object tree" for example, will not be affected at all by integrating
pgscript.

Whereas we should of course integrate them at all points where it's
reasonable, because that is likely to give a much better user experience.

//Magnus