Re: phase 2 of wxWidgets 2.9 build
От | Dave Page |
---|---|
Тема | Re: phase 2 of wxWidgets 2.9 build |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTik6Zy03x+xqG4htV2-aFM3gNoj9+xL0LH+LzN0f@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | phase 2 of wxWidgets 2.9 build (Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: phase 2 of wxWidgets 2.9 build
|
Список | pgadmin-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm glad to see my work to date on wxWidgets 2.9 compatibility has > been committed. > > We have 4 (and now, I think, 2) problems: I like 2 best. Let's choose that one :-) > 3. Linker problems on 2.9 + OGL as they exist on my system. I think > these can be resolved by playing around with the OGL bakefile. > > 4. The OGL Problem itself. The task of talking to contributors and > getting them to re-licence is ongoing. I suppose we'll have to > integrate OGL, and build it as part of our own build system. Should I > get started on this in anticipation of the re-licensing going ahead? > It would be nice if our Makefile just invoked a separate > makefile/build system for OGL, so OGL remained self-contained and > could easily be used by third parties. I think you should assume we'll go ahead. Every response so far has been positive, including the leading contributor who is responsible for 99% of the code. I don't think we should spend time trying to separate the build. We're not trying to maintain this for third party users - most of them will find the published code usable. It's only a problem for those of us with BSD style licences, and even they could just replace our module.mk files with the equivalent for their projects in a matter of minutes, much as we will replace the bakefile. Will you use the code that Julian sent you, or stick with the original? -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgadmin-hackers по дате отправления: