Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pgScript patch

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: "Mickael Deloison" <mdeloison(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgScript patch
Date: 2008-08-12 14:33:49
Message-ID: 937d27e10808120733v2261fa4ay3c494df1472576bc@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackers
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.

-- 
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2008-08-12 14:39:35
Subject: Re: pgScript patch
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2008-08-12 14:29:43
Subject: Re: pgScript patch

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group