On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Craig Ringer
<cr...@postnewspapers.com.au> wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Craig Ringer
>> <cr...@postnewspapers.com.au> wrote:
>>> Why _not_ distribute gettext headers, though? Sources I can understand
>>> for size reasons, but the headers are small and fuss free, and you need
>>> the _right_ _versions_ to build against the Pg backend.
>> No reason, other than I didn't realise they were needed to build extension.
> Ah, fair enough. I read:
>> We do include the library. We don't include the headers or source for
>> third party code though - that would be considered part of the build
>> environment, just the same as the Windows SDK.
> as "we don't want to distribute third-party headers even if required by
> Pg's own headers" and thus thought you *did* know but by policy didn't
> want to distribute them.

I didn't know in this case, but was making a general statement about
how I felt the policy should be.

Plus I was feeling a little grumpy in my pre-coffee state. Sorry :-p

Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PG East Conference: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to