On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Mickael Deloison <mdeloison(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The big question. You told me that my first patch is a huge patch.
Yes, but that was just a passing comment - I didn't mean we shouldn't
use it, or that you needed to reduce the size. I hope you didn't spend
too much time on it because of a misunderstanding.
> Indeed! A big code review is required and perhaps a lot of more tests.
> So maybe this way of doing (separate program) is good for now. What's
> your opinion about that? Should I keep pgScript code integrated into
> pgAdmin or should I keep it as a separate program?
Well that really is an interesting question. I'm not sure I know the
answer, so I'll attempt to sum up some pros and cons and see what the
other hackers think:
- One less dependency for packages to worry about
- One build system to maintain
- Functionality is more responsive
- No problems with different DLL versions if builds come from
- Cannot be broken by moving one exe etc.
- pgScript can be maintained (and upgraded) independently of pgAdmin
- No big impact on the pgAdmin source tree (and consequent learning
curve for other developers).
Despite the difference in numbers, I think those pros and cons are
Any other thoughts? (Magnus, Guillaume, Hiroshi etc).
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
In response to
pgadmin-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2008-08-12 14:29:43|
|Subject: Re: pgScript patch|
|Previous:||From: Luis Ochoa||Date: 2008-08-12 13:33:35|
|Subject: New Patch for GQB|