Looks reasonable to me.
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 10:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
>> <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 09:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>> >> On Monday, May 7, 2012, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> >> > Given that it's self contained, and we *do* expect it to get in
>> >> > eventually, how many places would you have to put #ifdef's in to
>> >> leave
>> >> > the code in the main branch and just not have it build there?
>> > Not much. It would be quite easy to do.
>> Then I suggest that path.
> See attached patch.
>> >> If Guillaume is going to continue to work on the feature, I'd be happy
>> >> with #ifdef's and a configure switch to enable that code.
>> > I want to continue the work on it. But to be completely honest, it isn't
>> > my priority. My priority is to get new releases of pgAdmin with the
>> > biggest support of the new PostgreSQL features.
>> That seems like reasonable priorities. But if it were to decent to the
>> point of being basically "dead code", it shuld be removed.
> I agree.
>> > I'll work on a patch with the ifdef's. It'll be much less work.
> Waiting comments before applying.
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgadmin-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Guillaume Lelarge||Date: 2012-05-07 20:06:22|
|Subject: pgAdmin III commit: Database designer is now not compiled by default|
|Previous:||From: Guillaume Lelarge||Date: 2012-05-07 19:46:22|
|Subject: Re: 1.16 beta 1 ?|