| From: | Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com> |
| Cc: | 'Neil Conway' <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: fork/exec patch |
| Date: | 2003-12-14 23:31:10 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0312150027550.10157-100000@zigo.dhs.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-patches |
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Claudio Natoli wrote:
> Moreover, in general, how do we handle things like this? IMHO, I'd rather
> live with a few kludges (that don't impact the *nix code) until the Windows
> port is actually a reality
As long as it does not hurt the unix code it's not a big problem as I see
it. The usual open source solution is that since no one else writes the
code, you can do it the way you think works the best. To change this in
the future does not mean that everything else has to be rewritten which is
good.
It does also not mean that one can not discuss the implementation. A fair
amount of discussion is always good.
--
/Dennis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-12-14 23:43:54 | Re: [PATCHES] fork/exec patch |
| Previous Message | Claudio Natoli | 2003-12-14 23:15:00 | Re: fork/exec patch |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-12-14 23:43:54 | Re: [PATCHES] fork/exec patch |
| Previous Message | Claudio Natoli | 2003-12-14 23:15:00 | Re: fork/exec patch |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-12-14 23:43:54 | Re: [PATCHES] fork/exec patch |
| Previous Message | Claudio Natoli | 2003-12-14 23:15:00 | Re: fork/exec patch |