Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up
От | Markus Wanner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20090602130814.115518sn5xvmbme6@mail.bluegap.ch обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up (Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up
Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, Quoting "Marko Kreen" <markokr@gmail.com>: >> I don't care half as much about the keyword expansion stuff - that's >> doomed to disappear anyway. > > But this is one aspect we need to get right for the conversion. What's your definition of "right"? I personally prefer the keyword expansion to match a cvs checkout as closely as possible. > So preferably we test it sooner not later. I actually *am* testing against that. As mentioned, the only differences are insignificant, IMO. For example having "1.1.1.1" instead of "1.1" (or vice versa, I don't remember). > I think Aidan got it right - expand $PostgreSQL$ and others that are > actually expanded on current repo, but not $OpenBSD$ and others > coming from external sources. AFAIU Aidan proposed the exact opposite. I'm proposing to leave both expanded, as in a CVS checkout and as shipped in the source release tarballs. > I'd prefer we immediately test full conversion and not leave some > steps to last moment. IMO that would equal to changing history, so that a checkout from git doesn't match a released tarball as good as possible. What you call "leave(ing) some steps to last moment" is IMO not part of the conversion. It's rather a conscious decision to drop these keywords as soon as we switch to git. This step should be represented in history as a separate commit, IMO. What do others think? Regards Markus Wanner
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: