On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 13:17:50 -0500, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Are you suggesting the that postgres project develop their own logger > > rather than people just using one that has already been developed > > by some other group? > > The problem from the point of view of Red Hat is to not introduce a > dependency from the Postgres RPM to the Apache RPM ... this is no > problem for people who don't mind hand-customizing their setup, but > it is a problem if you want it to be part of the out-of-the-box setup.
I can see their problem with making a dependency to all of apache or including multilog in their distribution. But they probably could include something that is only a logger either using some project that is only a logger or splitting out the logger that is bundled with apache. Then it wouldn't be unreasonable to make a dependency for postgres requiring that logging rpm. Other services could also make use of this logging package as well. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
