On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> Le 18/06/2010 22:59, Dave Page a écrit :
>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>> <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>>> PS: of course, I won't commit until we branch out 1.12.
>> I think I've given up on my desire to have a sequential commit
>> reference for QA's benefit. We should figure out how we can move to
>> GIT withut breaking the back branches which currently still use that.
> I don't get it. What are you afraid of breaking? the sequential commit
> reference will break for everything, back branches and trunk.
The current code expects to be in an SVN repo, and runs things like
'svn info' at build time.
>> Doing so would make this sort of work easier....
> As a matter of fact, it'll make it easier. But it's already not that
> hard. I just keep it in a separate branch, and merging is really easy
> with git. Moreover, I don't intend to work on a lot of patches till we
> branch. This one was just a warm-up. I'll now work on a better i18n. And
> then, exclusion constraint and SQL/Med objects. Which would already be
> great to have in mid-august.
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
In response to
pgadmin-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Onur GUZEL||Date: 2010-06-20 20:00:46|
|Subject: Create Table Dialog: Change Column after creation/Reorder Columns|
|Previous:||From: Guillaume Lelarge||Date: 2010-06-18 21:55:10|
|Subject: Re: Ticket 186: Reseting a table/function's statistics|