On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: > Hmm, virtualenv's a good point. > > I wonder if for the RPMs (and DEBs) we're just trying too hard. Is there > any good reason to support SxS there? Stability I suppose, but then we > don't support back-branches long term anyway. > pgAdmin IV may need particular version of third party libraries. We may not control over, what other application will require.
Hence - it can create dependency issue. > > Does anyone think we need to support side-by-side RPM/DEB installation of > multiple major versions of pgAdmin? Devrim? Hamid? > I do not feel the requirement of it. -- Thanks & Regards, Ashesh Vashi EnterpriseDB INDIA: Enterprise PostgreSQL Company <http://www.enterprisedb.com/> *http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi* <http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi> > > The config file would be part of the web package. > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Sandeep Thakkar < > sandeep.thak...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> I already asked them about the APIs, though I didn't ask them about what >> is the best way to handle SxS installation. Will check with them. >> >> PIP package for pgadmin4 doesn't support SxS as it creates the directory >> with the name 'pgadmin4' only. Googling about the SxS with PIP says that >> people use virtualenv to achieve it. >> >> Regarding pgadmin4-v1.conf - will it be a part of pgadmin4-docs RPM? >> Needed for Debian also? >> >> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> >>> I have no idea. I would ask one of the Python guru's sitting next to you >>> (as well as whether the way we'd handle side-by-side packages is >>> appropriate). Also, look at what the PIP package does (does that even work >>> properly in a SxS scenario? I don't know if we thought to check that). >>> >>> BTW; on the RPMs - we also need to include a config snippet for Apache, >>> e.g. /etc/httpd/conf.d/pgadmin4-v1.conf. The online docs for pgAdmin have a >>> section on configuring that. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Sandeep Thakkar < >>> sandeep.thak...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Yeah, I got the point. To distinguish between v1 and v2, we can have >>>> blank __init__.py in the v1 and v2 directories. I tried it and could >>>> successfully import the pgAdmin4 using "import pgadmin4_web_v1.pgAdmin4" >>>> and "import pgadmin4_web_v2.pgAdmin4". Please note that I had to rename >>>> hyphen to underscore in the directories to achieve this. >>>> >>>> But, I spent enough time to find the API that can get me the location >>>> for "pgadmin4_web_v1.pgAdmin4" module, but couldn't find it. Do you have an >>>> idea? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> My point is that the runtime uses the platform supplied Python >>>>> interpreter, which presumably knows where to search for packages. Mind >>>>> you, >>>>> I suppose the issue there is that it wouldn't be able to distinguish >>>>> between v1 and v2 then... >>>>> >>>>> I don't have a major issue with your suggested code - I just want to >>>>> make sure we need it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Sandeep Thakkar < >>>>> sandeep.thak...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Do you mean to say when a python app is launched, it imports some >>>>>> modules automatically and in that sense it knows about where it's >>>>>> site-packages are? May be, but how the pgAdmin4 runtime will know where >>>>>> the >>>>>> Web App is installed? >>>>>> >>>>>> The changes that I have done to the runtime is to let it know the >>>>>> path of the Web App which is present in >>>>>> "/site-packages/pgadmin4-web-v1/pgAdmin4.py" The changes done are not to >>>>>> set the PythonPath like we did for appbundle because I thought it is not >>>>>> needed and it will automatically load the modules from the site-packages, >>>>>> but it is to set the ApplicationPath. >>>>>> >>>>>> I missed something? or misunderstood something? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, I have to wonder why we need the changes to the runtime? We're >>>>>>> linking the runtime with the same build of Python that's already on the >>>>>>> system - doesn't it know where it's site-packages are already? I could >>>>>>> see >>>>>>> us needing this is we were using a distro-independent build of Python >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> wanted to find the OS site-packages location, but we're not. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Sandeep Thakkar < >>>>>>> sandeep.thak...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Dave, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> how about changes in the pgadmin4 source code for conf.py and >>>>>>>> Server.cpp? Looks okay? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Sandeep Thakkar < >>>>>>>> sandeep.thak...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks Dave. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Sandeep Thakkar >>>>>>>>>> <sandeep.thak...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> > Hi Devrim, Hi Dave, >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > I have updated the patch. The earlier patch may fail because of >>>>>>>>>> app bundle >>>>>>>>>> > commit in git. >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > For testing, you may define the source tarball location as : >>>>>>>>>> > Source0: >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> http://bugatti.pn.in.enterprisedb.com/temp/pgadmin4/%{name}-v%{version}.tar.gz >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > Known issue that I'm still working on: >>>>>>>>>> > 1. web rpm has a dependency on doc. But, even if I install doc, >>>>>>>>>> the web >>>>>>>>>> > still complains. Here is the scenario: >>>>>>>>>> > [root@localhost tmp]# rpm -ivh >>>>>>>>>> > dist/noarch/pgadmin4-web-1.0_dev-1.rhel7.noarch.rpm >>>>>>>>>> > error: Failed dependencies: >>>>>>>>>> > pgadmin4-doc = 1.0_dev is needed by >>>>>>>>>> pgadmin4-web-1.0_dev-1.rhel7.noarch >>>>>>>>>> > ... ( trimmed the python dependencies list here...) >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > [root@localhost tmp]# rpm -ivh >>>>>>>>>> > dist/noarch/pgadmin4-docs-1.0_dev-1.rhel7.noarch.rpm >>>>>>>>>> > Preparing... >>>>>>>>>> ################################# >>>>>>>>>> > [100%] >>>>>>>>>> > Updating / installing... >>>>>>>>>> > 1:pgadmin4-docs-1.0_dev-1.rhel7 >>>>>>>>>> ################################# >>>>>>>>>> > [100%] >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > [root@localhost tmp]# yum list | grep pgadmin4-docs >>>>>>>>>> > pgadmin4-docs.noarch 1.0_dev-1.rhel7 >>>>>>>>>> > installed >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > [root@localhost tmp]# rpm -ivh >>>>>>>>>> > dist/noarch/pgadmin4-web-1.0_dev-1.rhel7.noarch.rpm >>>>>>>>>> > error: Failed dependencies: >>>>>>>>>> > pgadmin4-doc = 1.0_dev is needed by >>>>>>>>>> pgadmin4-web-1.0_dev-1.rhel7.noarch >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You have a typo - the Requires line is for pgadmin4-doc, but the >>>>>>>>>> RPM >>>>>>>>>> is pgadmin4-docs. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Oh, right. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Other review comments: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - We have multiple identical pgadmin4.spec.in's in the patch. We >>>>>>>>>> need >>>>>>>>>> to get that down to a single file. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - In fact, why do we need a directory for each distro at all? As >>>>>>>>>> far >>>>>>>>>> as I can see, the only difference is the $DIST definition, which >>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>> surely something we can get programmatically very easily. It >>>>>>>>>> seems to >>>>>>>>>> me we could reduce this all to 3 files - Makefile, README and >>>>>>>>>> pgadmin4.spec.in >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Agree. I copied the structure from somewhere thinking this is >>>>>>>>> good to have more OS specific changes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - make rpm has a dependency on make prep. This has 2 issues as >>>>>>>>>> far as I can see: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - It does a git pull, which is bad. If I'm making an RPM from >>>>>>>>>> within >>>>>>>>>> the source tree, I want it for the current source. The git pull >>>>>>>>>> only >>>>>>>>>> makes sense for external builds, i.e. in a much larger automated >>>>>>>>>> build >>>>>>>>>> system. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - It goes and grabs the source code and patches from the FTP >>>>>>>>>> site. >>>>>>>>>> Again, this is not what I want for an "in-tree" build. I want to >>>>>>>>>> use >>>>>>>>>> the source code as I have it now. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Okay. got it. Will remove downloading the tarballs and build the >>>>>>>>> cloned source. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Dave Page >>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >>>>>>>>>> Twitter: @pgsnake >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>>>>>>>>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Sandeep Thakkar >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Sandeep Thakkar >>>>>>>> Lead Software Engineer >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Phone: +91.20.30589505 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Website: www.enterprisedb.com >>>>>>>> EnterpriseDB Blog: http://blogs.enterprisedb.com/ >>>>>>>> Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/enterprisedb >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This e-mail message (and any attachment) is intended for the use of >>>>>>>> the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. This message contains >>>>>>>> information from EnterpriseDB Corporation that may be privileged, >>>>>>>> confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> not the intended recipient or authorized to receive this for the >>>>>>>> intended >>>>>>>> recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, retention, archiving, >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have >>>>>>>> received >>>>>>>> this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply >>>>>>>> e-mail >>>>>>>> and delete this message. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Dave Page >>>>>>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >>>>>>> Twitter: @pgsnake >>>>>>> >>>>>>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>>>>>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sandeep Thakkar >>>>>> Lead Software Engineer >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Phone: +91.20.30589505 >>>>>> >>>>>> Website: www.enterprisedb.com >>>>>> EnterpriseDB Blog: http://blogs.enterprisedb.com/ >>>>>> Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/enterprisedb >>>>>> >>>>>> This e-mail message (and any attachment) is intended for the use of >>>>>> the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. This message contains >>>>>> information from EnterpriseDB Corporation that may be privileged, >>>>>> confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are >>>>>> not the intended recipient or authorized to receive this for the intended >>>>>> recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, retention, archiving, or >>>>>> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have >>>>>> received >>>>>> this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply >>>>>> e-mail >>>>>> and delete this message. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dave Page >>>>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >>>>> Twitter: @pgsnake >>>>> >>>>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>>>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sandeep Thakkar >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dave Page >>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >>> Twitter: @pgsnake >>> >>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sandeep Thakkar >> >> > > > -- > Dave Page > Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com > Twitter: @pgsnake > > EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >
