will do it tonight :)
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Any chance of getting a pgsql-patches link on archives.postgresql.org?
I know the archives are created (I use them) but there is no obvious
link.
Secondly, could the links that do exist be
-patches added ... I've gotta redo that page, as it was just a
'quick-n-dirty' when I did it ...
On 27 Jun 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
Vince, we can get -advocacy listed on the web site? There has been no
traffic over there until now, but there are ppl subscribed to it ...
all done.
http://archives.postgresql.org/ ... better?
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
will do it tonight :)
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Any chance of getting a pgsql-patches link on archives.postgresql.org?
I know the archives
On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://archives.postgresql.org/ ... better?
Yup, although I'd suggest making the classification line up with
the one on the main website --- docs and cygwin are listed as
developer lists there.
Also, someone
On 27 Jun 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
Also, someone suggested listing the by-month indexes back-to-front
(most recent month first), which seems like a great idea if not
difficult.
Better?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc
The rest will 'fall in line' once there is
shows up fine for me ... browser issue? :( is there a tag missing that
you can pick out in view source? *raised eyebrow*
On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc, did you do anything to the format of the individual archive
message pages? The top index pages look great, but when I go to,
Is this sort of like Oracle guaranteeing its uncrackable, but as soon as
someone comes to them to prove it is, Oracle's response is but DBA didn't
enable the obscure security feature that can be found here, that is
disabled by default?
On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Tim Hart wrote:
Could very well be.
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Friday 28 June 2002 10:46 am, Tom Lane wrote:
Guido Ostkamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am sure, a lot of people would be happy, if those groups were
officially introduced and hosted on many international newservers.
Yup. Are you
On Sat, 29 Jun 2002, Guido Ostkamp wrote:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guido Ostkamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am sure, a lot of people would be happy, if those groups were
officially introduced and hosted on many international newservers.
Yup. Are you volunteering to be the
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Curt Sampson wrote:
While there are big changes between 7.2 and the next release, they
aren't really any bigger than others during the 7.x series. I don't
really feel that the next release is worth an 8.0 rather than a 7.3. But
this is just an opinion; it's not something
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually, the big change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ...
Only those that inspect system catalogs --- I'm not sure what percentage
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
Actually, the big change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ... which,
I'm guessing, is pretty major, no? :)
I've always thought of our release numbering as having themes.
On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 12:39:13PM -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:
One other usability note: why can't postmaster perform the steps of
an initdb if -D points to an empty directory?
Rank newbies shouldn't be
Just a test to make sure both are being used properly ... should help
increase overall list speeds ...
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On Sat, 10 Aug 2002, Jeff MacDonald wrote:
How long did it take you to teach him to say PostgreSQL ? :)
Lessee, the conversation went something like this:
Me: I need a wav file of you saying PostgreSQL.
Him: PostgreSQL?
Me: Yeah.
Him: Ok,
On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, Gustavo Gonzalez Giron wrote:
Hello Dave... thank you for pay attention to our application.
Couple of questions?
Couple of answers! :)
1) Why did you choose the GPL license, I expect it cannot be added to
the postgres distribution with that license? Postgres
Best would be to get it added as a project on GBorg ... Chris is working
on changes to GBorg to allow a project to be added to the site *without*
it necessarily be 'hosted' there, so that projects like this, or PgAdmin,
can be tracked through on central location, without limiting the
developers
Something to maybe add to the TODO list, if someone has the
time/inclination to work on it ...
The problem with the current auth system, as I see it, is that you can't
easily have seperate user lists and passwords per database ... its shared
across the system ...
The closest you can get is to
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 12:43:52AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
since as soon as there are two 'bruce' users, only one can have a password
I guess I don't understand why that's a problem. I mean, if you're
authenticating users, how can you
God, I go through 200+ of those almost daily as moderator ... imagine if
we had the lists open? :)
On Sat, 27 Jul 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Hi guys,
I seem to be getting virus emails that pretend to be one of your guys. eg.
I get them from T.Ishii and N.Conway, etc. Anyone
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Something to maybe add to the TODO list, if someone has the
time/inclination to work on it ...
The problem with the current auth system, as I see it, is that you can't
easily have seperate user lists and passwords per
am looking at it now ... trying to figure out where we're using 30gig of
space righ tnow :(
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Hi guys,
When I try to do a cvs up I get this:
can't create temporary directory /var/tmp/cvs-serv39998
No space left on device
And on the 15min
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Actually, it is replaced by encrypted pg_shadow by default in 7.3, and
the new USER (users or groups) column in pg_hba.conf that will be in 7.3
that can restrict based on user/group. This replaces the use of the
secondary file for just usernames.
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
First and foremost in my mind ... how do you have two users in the system
with seperate passwords? ...
since as soon as there are two 'bruce' users, only one can have a password
Uh, we've *never* supported
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
First and foremost in my mind ... how do you have two users in the system
with seperate passwords? ...
since as soon as there are two 'bruce' users, only one can have a password
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Uh, we've *never* supported two bruce users ...
He was being tricky by having different passwords for the same user on
each database, so one user couldn't get into
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
You seem to have done a nice job with the + and @ for 'maps' ... how about
third on that states that the map file has a username:password pair in it?
I do like how the pg_hba.conf has changed, just don't like the lose
:
uvscan --analyse --recursive --mime --summary --program /var/spool/mail
On 28 Jul 2002, Larry Rosenman wrote:
On Sun, 2002-07-28 at 20:10, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
God, I go through 200+ of those almost daily as moderator ... imagine if
we had the lists open? :)
I picked up a copy of McAfee's
figured it out ... uvscan isn't looking where ports installed the newer
.dat files ... fixed that and it finds 63 virii infected files instead of
just 5 :)
one step closer ...
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Okay, am playing with this on one of my 'none-critical' servers right
Okay, this is sweet ... but can someone tell me where I 'Buy' a copy of
uvscan? I've searched McAfee, but can't seem to find it in their eStore
anywhere ...
On 28 Jul 2002, Larry Rosenman wrote:
On Sun, 2002-07-28 at 20:10, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
God, I go through 200+ of those almost
add in 'fix pg_hba.conf / password issues' to that too :)
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Here are the open items for 7.3. We have one more month to address them
before beta.
---
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
* libpqxx is not integrated into build process nor docs. It should
be integrated or reversed out before beta.
I've requestsed that Jeorgen(sp?) move this over to GBorg ... its
something that can, and should be, built seperately from the base
distribution,
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 02:08:33PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
One reason for wanting to integrate libpqxx is that I don't think we'll
find out anything about its portability until we get a lot
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 02:11:06AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
* libpqxx is not integrated into build process nor docs. It should
be integrated or reversed out before beta.
I've requestsed that Jeorgen
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Conway) writes:
Mentioning that on -hackers would have been nice -- I've spent a while
this week hacking autoconf / Makefiles to integrate libpqxx...
Marc's opinion is not the same thing as a done deal ;-) --- we still
have to
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 02:01:43AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
add in 'fix pg_hba.conf / password issues' to that too :)
I doubt that will make 7.3 -- the proposals I've seen on this topic
require some reasonably complex additions
Okay ... since this is pretty much going to be 'one camp for, one camp
against' without anything to really back up either camps perspectives /
arguments, I did some research on CVS in order to find a nice, effective
middle ground ... and it actually works quite sweet ...
Basically, CVS let's
I've just updated the README.cvsup file in order to reflect the changes,
to provide a sample of how to download the whole thing, as well as
instructions on how to do just a particular module:
[ Updated README.cvsup ]=
# This file represents the
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, I have thought about this. First, a possible solution would be to
have a GUC variable that prepends the dbname to all username
specifications, so the username becomes dbname.username. When you
CREATE USER test, it actually does CREATE USER
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
One idea I had was to look for a colon in the username, and if I see
one, I assume everything after the colon is a password. Would that work
for you?
That would definitely work ... but I *really* like your GUC idea ... it
would allow ppl to change
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Ron Snyder wrote:
Yes, is that your pg_hba.conf line? 'password' is insecure over
networks you don't trust.
Yes, we're using 'password password' in our pg_hba.conf file. I trust my
network (so far).
That is another major limitation to
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Okay ... since this is pretty much going to be 'one camp for, one camp
against' without anything to really back up either camps perspectives /
arguments, I did some research on CVS in order to find a nice, effective
middle ground ... and
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Ron Snyder wrote:
Yes, is that your pg_hba.conf line? 'password' is insecure over
networks you don't trust.
Yes, we're using 'password password' in our
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Ron Snyder wrote:
Yes, is that your pg_hba.conf line? 'password' is insecure over
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I am working on it now. I decided against doing any kind of database
prepending at the user level. You create the user as 'dbname.username'.
That is clearer, rather than prepending based on the db you are
connected
thanks for the heads up, fixed ... part of the generation code was flawed,
in that it tried to move a directory that didn't exist, failed and exited
the script *roll eyes* added in an 'if' to make sure the directory
exists, and am running it manually now ...
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, bpalmer
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Access to nothing. I could actually try to quality by dbname.username,
then fall back to just username, but that seems insecure
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Thomas Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Until we have folks who are excited enough about it to plan it out and
do the work, piecemeal rejection of components is not leading to a more
solid product.
I'm lukewarm about whether to actually do the split
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
...
*Eventually*, a simple checkout of 'pgsql' should result in a server
only distribution that we can pull bits and pieces into transparently ...
I'm still not quite sure where this is headed or why, but if nothing
else pgsql could and should
... is once more 'normal' ...
there are three modules right now setup:
earthdistance
libpqxx
pgsql-server
pgsql combines all three of the above to transparently give the equivalent
of the whole distribution from its component parts ...
---(end of
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I realize that Marc wasn't proposing splitting off any
server-side code, but I still want to tread carefully about breaking
up the codebase.
Okay, well, the way I'm working it through right now, I'm doing
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
... is once more 'normal' ...
Uh, it's completely broken as far as I can tell.
$ pwd
/home/postgres/pgsql/src/bin/pg_dump
$ cvs status
cvs server: Examining .
cvs server: failed to create lock directory
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Rod Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Also, http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/ isn't working.
What'r you typin about? It works fine. Ok, ok.. It does *NOW*. :)
Well, of course that specific URL doesn't work because it's actually
Should be fixed now ... I found a rsync.core file, so it looks like the
changes may have been more extensive then rsync could handle ... just ran
it manually (or, rather, am running as I type this), so by the time you
receive, a checkout should grab the right structures ...
Let me know if it
, other then gettin gat the sub-modules themselves, CVSup is
broken ... anon-cvs will fair you better ...
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 12:56:11AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I've just updated the README.cvsup file in order to reflect the changes
Just making sure that I haven't screwed up anything plugging in amavis ...
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
anti-virus software ... see http://www.amavis.org ...
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Jeff MacDonald wrote:
got it...
what's amivis ?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Marc G. Fournier
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 10:17 AM
To: [EMAIL
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
So, from the 'client side', y'all will still see everything as one big
package, while from the 'server side', I'll have the seperate modules
taht can be packaged independently ...
Marc, how are you dealing with libpq's
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 10:39:47AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Actually, plpgsql is pretty expensive too. The thing to be benchmarking
is applications of plain old built-in-C functions and operators.
I thought part of the justification for this was
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Dann Corbit wrote:
I have discussed the idea of contributing our Win32 work to the
PostgreSQL project with management.
We have also converted all of the utilities (initdb, psql, pg_dump,
pg_restore, pg_id, pg_passwd, etc.)
Management is (rightfully) concerned about
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
So, from the 'client side', y'all will still see everything as one big
package, while from the 'server side', I'll have the seperate modules
taht
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Lamar Owen wrote:
And the sooner our very old perl client goes away, the better I like it. It
is a good client, don't get me wrong: but DBD:Pg is the standard now.
I have been in contact with Edmund about moving DBD into
Ummm ... stupid question, but can we even bring this into the 'core'?
You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public
License or the Artistic License, as specified in the Perl README file.
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
OK, I have attached a patch for testing. Sample output is:
$ sql -U guest test
psql: FATAL: user test.guest does not exist
$ createuser test.guest
I will object to any scheme
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, jtv wrote:
Looking at it that way, it seems to me that the proper approach is to
cut out all interfaces that don't talk to the backend themselves--e.g.
the ones that build on top of libpq, like libpq++ and libpqxx do.
This is what my opinion is ... what I'm setting up
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Ummm ... stupid question, but can we even bring this into the 'core'?
You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public
License or the Artistic License, as specified
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Greg Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I seem to find this argument a lot on the list here. For some reason,
many of the developers are under the impression that even if code is
never touched, it has a very high level of effort to keep it in the code
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=16:
(average = 28.6 seconds)
With FUNC_MAX_ARGS=32:
(average = 29.15 seconds)
That is almost a 2 percent cost. Shall we challenge someone to get us
back 2 percent from somewhere before the 7.3 release? Optimizing a hot
On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Joe Conway wrote:
I couldn't keep up with the list traffic this week, but I thought I saw
enough to convince me that after it was all said and done, I would still
be able to do `cvs co pgsql`. I'm finding today that after using cvsup
to sync up, I can no longer checkout
On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The problem I see now is that libpqxx has a completely different build
system and documentation system.
Unless someone's going to do the work to integrate libpqxx into our
build/documentation system, I have
should be fixed ... looks like just an ownership issue on a new directory
...
On 13 Aug 2002, Oliver Elphick wrote:
anoncvs is still broken:
cvs server: Updating src/interfaces/libpqxx/config
cvs server: Updating src/interfaces/libpqxx/debian
cvs server: failed to create lock directory
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, seeing as no one voted, and only Tom and I objected originally, we
will keep the code as Thomas has applied it, namely that PGXLOG/-X is
recognized by initdb, postmaster, postgres, and pg_ctl.
We will? It
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, seeing as no one voted, and only Tom and I objected originally, we
will keep the code as Thomas has applied it, namely that PGXLOG/-X is
recognized by initdb, postmaster, postgres,
On 13 Aug 2002, Greg Copeland wrote:
On Mon, 2002-08-12 at 23:09, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, seeing as no one voted, and only Tom and I objected originally, we
will keep the code as Thomas has applied it, namely that PGXLOG/-X is
recognized by initdb,
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I think Tom is on to something here. I meant to ask but never got
around to it. Why would anyone need to move the XLOG after you've
inited the db?
I just determined that disk I/O is terrible, so want to move
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marc G. Fournier writes:
Okay, but if we are going to pull libpqxx, what about the other lib's too?
Certain things apply to libpqxx that don't all apply to the others libs:
It is maintained and developed
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
If you move pg_xlog, you have to create a symlink in /data that points
to the new location. Initdb would do that automatically, but if you
move it after initdb, you would have to create the symlink yourself.
With Thomas's current code, you would
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:38:00PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
should be fixed ... looks like just an ownership issue on a new directory
More like I uploaded that directory just as you were rsync'ing to
anonymous CVS and a lock file got
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Gavin Sherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I think this belongs on gborg. Would you create a project there?
A number of people at OSCON did consider this to be a nice contrib
feature. Out of curiousity, what
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Anything in contrib that can be built seperately from the server code,
that just requires libpq and headers, should be pulled and distributed as
seperate modules, which has the added benefit that, if listed on GBorg
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Anything in contrib that can be built seperately from the server code,
that just requires libpq and headers, should be pulled and distributed
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
OK, we got _that_ answer. Looks like gborg. Marc really wants to pump
that up.
I think if gborg had a different name and looked more like the main site,
more people would consider using it without feeling kicked out.
On 14 Aug 2002, Oliver Elphick wrote:
cvs server: Updating src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/ascii_and_mic
cvs server: failed to create lock directory for
`/projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/src/backend/utils/mb/conversion_procs/ascii_and_mic'
all gone ...
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
Who the hell are these people and why can't they configure their
own MTA?
Vince.
--
==
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSHemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
integrate or remove new libpqxx
integrate or add to gborg Pg:DBD
Seems like gborg is the place for these.
I would volunteer to package libpq++ separately.
Okay, the procedure is simple, but where do we want to put this? Do we
want
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, I am ready to do the work, but I would like to get a plan of where
we are going. I see in interfaces:
cli
ecpg
jdbc
libpgeasy
libpgtcl
libpq
libpq++
libpqxx
odbc
perl5
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now, I know one of Marc's goals is to have libpq as a stand-alone
tarball, but I thought we decided that this _didn't_ require it to be in
a separate CVS repository.
Removing libpq is impossible since psql,
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Chris has made code changes to GBorg to allow for this based on requests
from Dave Page (ie. PgAdminII) ... so there is no problems with that ...
As for keeping them in our main CVS, the more we put over onto GBorg
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the only unknown is whether their CVS's should be moved out of
the main tree.
Yes, they should be ...
Certainly. I was a bit worried about losing CVS history, but Marc
indicated he could make
On Sun, 18 Aug 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Marc G. Fournier writes:
Okay, here is what I'd like to suggest ... Bruce, let's start off really
simple ... go create a project for libpq++ (I believe someone even
volunteered to maintain it?) and let me know once created, and I'll move
On 21 Aug 2002, Robert Treat wrote:
Assuming that we do go ahead with a 7.2.2 release, can we get some kind
of unofficial statement on pushing back the 7.3 beta? I know Tom was
v7.3 goes beta Sept 1st ... v7.2.2 will be purely a security bugfix
release, with no changes in functionality that
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
We learned a few lessons from previous releases. First, don't delay
the beta by days/weeks that drag on. Delay one month at a time.
Second, don't decide on a further delay the day before you are going to
go beta. Multiple short-period delays and
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Justin Clift wrote:
- Find out from Sir Mordred if he wants to take a look at the CVS
version of code and audit in that for a bit, Just In Case he turns
up something that's serious and requires substantial re-work.
Although it means he wouldn't have a bunch of
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Justin Clift wrote:
Only two things which have the potential to be worth waiting for, from
what I'm aware of. There may be others:
- Find out from Sir Mordred if he wants to take a look at the CVS
version of code and audit in that for a
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Justin Clift wrote:
Reckon it's worth asking him, to find out if he'd be interested in this?
I wouldn't do it yet until we know if we are going to delay.
Any security audit of the code should *not* be done while the code is in
flux, and if we
On 21 Aug 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
Agreed. If patches are applied to the 7.4 branch as fast as normal,
then maybe 7.4 will only be 6 months out with well tested Windows, PIT,
etc. code that gets applied this October.
Whats the intended branchpoint? Beta with less than 5 patches? 3rd
beta
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On 21 Aug 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
Agreed. If patches are applied to the 7.4 branch as fast as normal,
then maybe 7.4 will only be 6 months out with well tested Windows, PIT,
etc. code that gets applied this October
their opinions where being
heard.
---
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Justin Clift wrote:
Reckon it's worth asking him, to find out if he'd be interested in this?
I
Morning all ...
This afternoon, Bruce Momjiam created a new project on GBorg for
libpq++, and Jeroen T. Vermeulen created one for libpqxx ... Both projects
source directory from the central CVS repository have been copied over,
including full history logs, and can be viewed at:
501 - 600 of 1670 matches
Mail list logo
