-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Le 12 août 08 à 18:41, Bruce Momjian a écrit :
Are you proposing that we should introduce our own packaging system
for
such add-on components? Like CP(g)AN (which has been proposed
before..)?
Yes, pretty much. I imagine some kind of web
On Aug 12, 2008, at 2:26 AM, Dave Page wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 4:13 AM, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
So, ideally, if we do a plug-in system, I think we need some way
to have
these plugins be very easily installed, perhaps by choosing object
files
pre-compile by the build
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 4:13 AM, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, ideally, if we do a plug-in system, I think we need some way to have
these plugins be very easily installed, perhaps by choosing object files
pre-compile by the build farm for each operating system.
Hmm, that idea
Hi,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
So, ideally, if we do a plug-in system, I think we need some way to have
these plugins be very easily installed, perhaps by choosing object files
pre-compile by the build farm for each operating system.
IIRC the main problem isn't compilation and packaging of plugins.
Am Tuesday, 12. August 2008 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
I feel the above comment about Firefox is the crux of the plugin issue.
The difference is that Firefox is an interactive eye-candy system whereas
PostgreSQL is a functionality-based server system. A PostgreSQL database
system needs to have a
Markus Wanner wrote:
Hi,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
So, ideally, if we do a plug-in system, I think we need some way to have
these plugins be very easily installed, perhaps by choosing object files
pre-compile by the build farm for each operating system.
IIRC the main problem isn't
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Am Tuesday, 12. August 2008 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
I feel the above comment about Firefox is the crux of the plugin issue.
The difference is that Firefox is an interactive eye-candy system whereas
PostgreSQL is a functionality-based server system. A PostgreSQL
Hi,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
The bottom line is that for software to be successful we need a critical
mass, and as long as we are doing OS-specific plugins we aren't going to
reach that critical mass because the OS-specific aspect splits up
demand.
What about the pgxs toolchain? Doesn't that
Markus Wanner wrote:
Hi,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
The bottom line is that for software to be successful we need a critical
mass, and as long as we are doing OS-specific plugins we aren't going to
reach that critical mass because the OS-specific aspect splits up
demand.
What about the
I can't speak for anyone else, but I much prefer packages that make
use of my operating system's package management system rather than
rolling their own. If I need a perl package that I can't get through
yum, I build my own RPMs rather than installing through CPAN.
I actually think that the
Hi,
Robert Haas wrote:
I can't speak for anyone else, but I much prefer packages that make
use of my operating system's package management system rather than
rolling their own. If I need a perl package that I can't get through
yum, I build my own RPMs rather than installing through CPAN.
I
Markus Wanner wrote:
Hi,
Robert Haas wrote:
I can't speak for anyone else, but I much prefer packages that make
use of my operating system's package management system rather than
rolling their own. If I need a perl package that I can't get through
yum, I build my own RPMs rather than
Hi,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
.. an OS-agnostic way of installing packages.
Uh.. I don't think such a thing exists.
I realize many prefer their OS-native packaging system, but
that isn't the target audience of a packaging system that will increase
adoption.
I'm just arguing that such a
Markus Wanner wrote:
Hi,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
.. an OS-agnostic way of installing packages.
Uh.. I don't think such a thing exists.
Seems to in Firefox.
I realize many prefer their OS-native packaging system, but
that isn't the target audience of a packaging system that will
On Aug 12, 2008, at 13:16, Bruce Momjian wrote:
.. an OS-agnostic way of installing packages.
Uh.. I don't think such a thing exists.
Seems to in Firefox.
And Perl's CPAN repository and installation module.
Best,
David
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Aug 12, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Markus Wanner wrote:
Hi,
Robert Haas wrote:
I can't speak for anyone else, but I much prefer packages that make
use of my operating system's package management system rather than
rolling their own. If I need a perl package that I can't get
.. an OS-agnostic way of installing packages.
Uh.. I don't think such a thing exists.
Seems to in Firefox.
And Perl's CPAN repository and installation module.
Don't forget the command line installation of packages for the R
programming language.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
.. an OS-agnostic way of installing packages.
Uh.. I don't think such a thing exists.
Seems to in Firefox.
I think nearly all Firefox extensions are written in XML and
Javascript. It's quite a bit easier to have an OS-agnostic way of
installing packages when the packages are
On Aug 12, 2008, at 18:12, Robert Haas wrote:
I realize many prefer their OS-native packaging system, but
that isn't the target audience of a packaging system that will
increase
adoption.
Really? Who is it?
Those of us who don't use packaging systems. And, we are legion.
Best,
David
Robert Haas wrote:
.. an OS-agnostic way of installing packages.
Uh.. I don't think such a thing exists.
Seems to in Firefox.
I think nearly all Firefox extensions are written in XML and
Javascript. It's quite a bit easier to have an OS-agnostic way of
installing packages when the
: [HACKERS] Plugin system like Firefox
Robert Haas wrote:
.. an OS-agnostic way of installing packages.
Uh.. I don't think such a thing exists.
Seems to in Firefox.
I think nearly all Firefox extensions are written in XML and
Javascript. It's quite a bit easier to have an OS-agnostic
21 matches
Mail list logo
