| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
| Date: | 2005-05-03 17:46:07 |
| Message-ID: | 4277B8DF.4000608@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Robert Treat wrote:
>
>Is telling the rpm maintainers to go fix their rpm's an option? As has
>been hashed out before, the only thing that makes plphp different from
>other pl's is that some of the current packagers are taking shortcuts
>with the packaging scripts which introduces dependency issues. IMHO what
>is included in the postgresql cvs and what is included in the main
>tarball for postgresql should not be dictated by outside packagers.
>
>
>
>
>
That wasn't my understanding of the previous discussion. Does not php
require pg client support configured in at build time?
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-03 17:51:55 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-05-03 17:36:52 | Re: [HACKERS] Decision Process WAS: Increased company |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-03 17:51:55 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-03 17:39:15 | Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1 |