| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Yuriy Zhuravlev <stalkerg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |
| Date: | 2017-01-27 14:40:55 |
| Message-ID: | 20170127144055.nc7ckp5tja5kquxu@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Right now, however, the patch isn't moving at all, and I don't see it
> going into PG10, so I'm fine with returning with feedback.
There are a bunch of side patches that we should apply separately, such
as the pgcrypto fix. I don't understand why they are part of this patch
series, really, given that they seem largely independent prerequisites.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-01-27 14:42:15 | Re: pg_ls_dir & friends still have a hard-coded superuser check |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-01-27 14:38:33 | Re: pg_background contrib module proposal |