| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Joel Miller <joelwmiller(at)sbcglobal(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [SUGGESTION] CVSync |
| Date: | 2006-03-23 23:15:05 |
| Message-ID: | 13671.1143155705@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> Any particular reason why straight CVS doesn't work for you? Are you
> that interested in having the log comment locally?
Personally, I'd really like to have a local repository copy, because
I spend a *lot* of time with cvsweb etc --- but I'm sure my needs are
several standard deviations away from the mean. So far I've been
discouraged from setting up a repository by the unreasonable
infrastructure needs of cvsup. So these alternatives do sound pretty
interesting.
Is csup protocol-compatible with cvsup? If so people could use it
without Marc having to do anything. Has anyone got experience with
it --- reliability, performance, etc?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tony Caduto | 2006-03-23 23:31:21 | Did this work in earlier version of Postgres? |
| Previous Message | Satoshi Nagayasu | 2006-03-23 23:04:39 | Re: Get explain output of postgresql in Tables |