Re: 1.16 beta 1 ?
От | Dave Page |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 1.16 beta 1 ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+OCxow1gTpfMAtp+toK-49KYJB-dxWqf5yqY5d3gHEyreMAMA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 1.16 beta 1 ? (Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>) |
Ответы |
Re: 1.16 beta 1 ?
|
Список | pgadmin-hackers |
Looks reasonable to me. On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 10:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Guillaume Lelarge >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> > On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 09:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Monday, May 7, 2012, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.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. >> >> Good. >> > > Waiting comments before applying. > > > -- > Guillaume > http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info > http://www.dalibo.com -- 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: