On 2017-01-30 10:26:18 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 1/30/17 1:28 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Given that fact, I just don't buy why it's a good idea to not also
> > replace autoconf initially.
> Well, I find it a bit scary.  If you do the big switch all at once, then
> you will have to dedicate the following 3 months to fixing complaints
> from developers and build farmers.

That'll be the case just as well if we spread it out over two cycles,
except that we'll have it in multiple phases, and we run into the danger
of a half-done conversion.

I'd rather not change systems at all than run into the danger of that.

> > Either we're able to properly test it - i.e. it runs all tests - on *nix or 
> > we're not.
> That would work if there were a single entry point into the build
> system.  But in practice there are many, and every one of them is
> someone's favorite.  It's unlikely that we will be able to enumerate all
> of them during patch review.

Not sure what you mean with "entry point"?

- Andres

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

Reply via email to