On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Jasmin Dizdarevic
wrote:
> Hi,
> back to the main topic: Email notification.
> This week I tried to use the wxSMTP library for the email notification
> feature - without success. There are two versions of the lib. One will not
> be supported in the future, the othe
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 16:07, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Actually, I take it back.
>>>
>>> The CHANGELOG on the REL-1_12_PATCHES has some changes for 1.12.1,
>>> 1.12.2, 1.12.3. And su
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 16:07, Dave Page wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Actually, I take it back.
>>
>> The CHANGELOG on the REL-1_12_PATCHES has some changes for 1.12.1,
>> 1.12.2, 1.12.3. And surprisingly enough also 1.14.0, which certainly
>> didn't exist b
Hi,
back to the main topic: Email notification.
This week I tried to use the wxSMTP library for the email notification
feature - without success. There are two versions of the lib. One will not
be supported in the future, the other is an alpha or beta. I hope this
extensions will be available as
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Actually, I take it back.
>
> The CHANGELOG on the REL-1_12_PATCHES has some changes for 1.12.1,
> 1.12.2, 1.12.3. And surprisingly enough also 1.14.0, which certainly
> didn't exist back then...
Yes - we've done it that way for years.
>
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 15:59, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 15:53, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, but it requires significant manual filtering *now* to produce it
>>> as well.
>>
>> No, it requires 30 seconds per commi
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 15:53, Dave Page wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>> Yes, but it requires significant manual filtering *now* to produce it
>> as well.
>
> No, it requires 30 seconds per commit that is worthy of mention.
> Dropping the changelog will mean
Re-indent source per new rules
Mega-run of the new "make style" command, to enforce
coding style. This is likely to cause conflicts with most
pending patches, but there shouldn't be many - and they should
be easy to resolve.
From now on, it's recommended to run "make style" before a commit
if you
Re-indent source per new rules
Mega-run of the new "make style" command, to enforce
coding style. This is likely to cause conflicts with most
pending patches, but there shouldn't be many - and they should
be easy to resolve.
From now on, it's recommended to run "make style" before a commit
if you
I've just pushed reindenting on master and 1.12 to the pgadmin repository.
Build target "make style" also pushed to both.
This is likely to cause conflicts with any and all patches you have
pending - sorry about that, but there's really no way around it.
Hopefully the git "patch merging magic" ca
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
> Yes, but it requires significant manual filtering *now* to produce it
> as well.
No, it requires 30 seconds per commit that is worthy of mention.
Dropping the changelog will mean that work gets pushed to me (or
Guillaume) to do immediate
add rule for astyle run
Branch
--
REL-1_12_0_PATCHES
Details
---
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=pgadmin3.git;a=commitdiff;h=588f0ca1134e528c5bf0f3bc61861fac377b8c95
Modified Files
--
Makefile.am | 10 ++
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
--
Sen
add rule for astyle run
Branch
--
master
Details
---
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=pgadmin3.git;a=commitdiff;h=9909991a9606e6f56135b10e246670f44992e0b1
Modified Files
--
Makefile.am | 10 ++
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
--
Sent via pgadmi
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 15:38, Jasmin Dizdarevic
wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm starting another thread for this topic. You'll find the last comment
> from Dave at the bottom.
>> 1. Step ordering
>> I suggest adding a column named "jstorder" to pgagent.pga_jobsteps, so
>> we don't have to rename the steps
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 14:58, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> Le 31/12/2010 10:54, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
>> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:19, Dave Page wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Magnus Hagander
>>> wrote:
I've updated code.pgadmin.org so it links to the git repo instead of
Hi,
I'm starting another thread for this topic. You'll find the last comment
from Dave at the bottom.
> 1. Step ordering
> I suggest adding a column named "jstorder" to pgagent.pga_jobsteps, so
> we don't have to rename the steps "A_", "B_" if an ordering is required.
In
> the GUI we would add
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 15:07, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> Le 31/12/2010 12:43, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
>> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 00:28, Guillaume Lelarge
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This 9.1 new feature is supported with this patch. It takes care of the
>>> table property tab, table dialog, and
Le 31/12/2010 12:43, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 00:28, Guillaume Lelarge
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This 9.1 new feature is supported with this patch. It takes care of the
>> table property tab, table dialog, and pg_dump window.
>>
>> Comments?
>
> Haven't tried building it,
Le 31/12/2010 10:52, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:30, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>> wrote:
>>> No to trac reports as they ain't complete now. Dave and I talked about
>>> that in Stuttgart, and we decided that quick bugs to fix
Le 31/12/2010 10:54, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:19, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Magnus Hagander
>> wrote:
>>> I've updated code.pgadmin.org so it links to the git repo instead of
>>> the no-longer-updated svn repo.
>>>
>>> I notice it's not b
Nope.
On 12/31/10, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:19, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Magnus Hagander
>> wrote:
>>> I've updated code.pgadmin.org so it links to the git repo instead of
>>> the no-longer-updated svn repo.
>>>
>>> I notice it's not being
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 00:28, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This 9.1 new feature is supported with this patch. It takes care of the
> table property tab, table dialog, and pg_dump window.
>
> Comments?
Haven't tried building it, but this looks weird:
-EVT_CHECKBOX(XRCID("chkHasOids"),
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:39, Dave Page wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Not unless you add a VC++ build step to do it too...
>>
>> Ah, wasn't aware you actually committed from Windows. Thought you
>> worked kind of like I do for the pg backend work which is
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:19, Dave Page wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> I've updated code.pgadmin.org so it links to the git repo instead of
>> the no-longer-updated svn repo.
>>
>> I notice it's not being linked from the www.pgadmin.org site at all -
>> I th
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:30, Dave Page wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> wrote:
>> No to trac reports as they ain't complete now. Dave and I talked about
>> that in Stuttgart, and we decided that quick bugs to fix won't have a
>> trac ticket. We'll only use trac's bu
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jasmin Dizdarevic
wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I'm not so keen on that - it could require some funky code to ensure
> that the user uses sequential (or at least, non-duplicate) numbers
> across all steps and would be a pain to upgrade to. Plus, there is
> precedence for using
26 matches
Mail list logo
