Re: wxWidgets 2.9 build

Le 17/01/2011 16:30, Peter Geoghegan a écrit :
> On 16 January 2011 22:39, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Peter Geoghegan
> [...]
>> How did the OGL port go? I looked at that briefly, and had a rough
>> build in 10 minutes or so iirc. Oh, and in answer to your previous
>> comments on the distribution; you're quite correct - the wxWidgets
>> licence isn't suitable for distribution with pgAdmin. We'd have to get
>> the patch applied upstream, or host our own port. If we need to do the
>> latter, then I guess we should also setup our own GIT repo.
>
> I didn't look at it yet. I thought that it would be better to leave it
> until there was a consensus on how to deal with it, and just tackle
> the landslide of other compiler errors. Hopefully the fact that
> compilation of certain TUs is terminated when ogl.h can't be included
> isn't masking a whole lot more errors at this point. Have we
> considered how maintaining OGL ourselves will affect package
> maintainers and so on?
>

Actually, I don't see us maintaining OGL. We don't have the manpower to
do that.

I'm wondering if we really need OGL. What do we use it for? because if
it's now out of wxWidgets and if it's an important component for us, we
aren't probably alone. What do the other guys do? Moreover, if they got
rid of it, it's also probably because they don't need it, meaning we
could use something else, available in wxWidgets 2.9 that would replace
OGL. That would be a really better way than maintaining a fork of OGL.

--
Guillaume
http://www.postgresql.fr
http://dalibo.com