Re: FW: Re: [PATCHES] Ant configuration

From: Ned Wolpert <ned(dot)wolpert(at)knowledgenet(dot)com>
To: "Jayesh K(dot) Parayali" <jparayali(at)TOTALFLOOD(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: FW: Re: [PATCHES] Ant configuration
Date: 2001-10-23 18:31:13
Message-ID: XFMail.20011023113113.ned.wolpert@knowledgenet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 23-Oct-2001 Jayesh K. Parayali wrote:
> Just a thought. Why not separate postgres and postgres jdbc in that
> case?

To be honest, this is the one thing I want to avoid if possible. Its important
that the postgres build system builds the 'official' interfaces as well, since
it keeps the two connect tightly.

I prefer to use ant to build Java code, but to be honest, I really just want to
be able to type either of the following, in the src/interfaces/jdbc directory:

ant jar
or
make jar

Both should give the same results. (Its kinda silly that the current technique
has 'make' call 'ant', but anyways...) The only two issues are multiple build
tools and ease for building the jdbc driver for non-UNIX users.

And to be more honest, I think we've spent too much time on this as is. If we
can't decide as a group, we should either a) vote on it (Least the CVS
committers should) or b) leave it for now. Either way, I'm going to stay out
of this discussion for now.

Virtually,
Ned Wolpert <ned(dot)wolpert(at)knowledgenet(dot)com>

D08C2F45: 28E7 56CB 58AC C622 5A51 3C42 8B2B 2739 D08C 2F45
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE71bdxiysnOdCML0URAoXlAJ4w6Nd9pXuCoJAawEpxBaE/DADsRwCfS0dK
tjPvtMsIWudhz641Ro12SgE=
=/uGM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-10-23 18:42:06 Re: FW: Re: [PATCHES] Ant configuration
Previous Message Jayesh K. Parayali 2001-10-23 18:26:40 gcj