If I'm understanding this right, that'd work for me!! Thanks for the
discussion.
As a 'drop in' part of xastir itself, I'd guess it'd make things quite a
bit larger distribution wise, but sure would make the cross platform bit
sweet.
I'd be a bit concerned with crossing up users package managers (RPM/DEB)
systems. No idea how or what may get over-written by their system's auto
update. But, if it was 'part and parcel' of Xastir itself, it's own
rapid deployment cycle would take care of updates and keep it separate
from any other SQL server already running (even Postgres). Am I
understanding this right or just getting concerned with things that
don't need to be worried about.
As always, those that are doing it - do it. The rest of us get to use it
and appreciate it!
73!
Gerry Creager wrote:
I think that, for most installs, we could have a PostgreSQL package that
could drop in and then a script that puts PostGIS on top, then import
the basic schemas.
I don't see it as more than a drop-in.
gerry
Jason Winningham wrote:
On Oct 4, 2007, at 7:03 PM, Tate Belden wrote:
Is that even possible? To standardize on a generic 'SQL' so a
specific set of features offered by any one SQL server don't dictate
that server and only that server can be used?
I seem to recall that postgres has some specific GIS-type extensions
(PostGIS?) that would be desirable for an xastir implementation.
<queue Gerry>
I wouldn't worry too much about portability issues - I would expect
the database engine to be at least as portable (if not more so) than
the rest of the xastir support packages.
-Jason
kg4wsv
_______________________________________________
Xastir mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir
_______________________________________________
Xastir mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir
