Re: JDBC split and move ...

On Sun, 10 Feb 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Marc G. Fournier writes:
>
> > The end result of all of these discussions is that there are
> > *several* pieces to our distribution that don't need to be *in* the
> > distribution, and several of *those* that would actually benefit from
> > being moved out ...
>
> Agreed.
>
> > After talking to Chris about how to go about doing the transition,
> > the plan is to build a Gborg project for it, make sure that Barry Lind
> > (god, I hope I got my names right here *grin*) has maintainership of the
> > project in Gborg, and then take and move the jdbc code from the pgsql
> > CVSROOT and move it into the project CVSROOT, where develoment of the JDBC
> > driver will continue ...
>
> The only thing I want to fiercely protest about this is the Gborg thing.
> The JDBC driver project already has its web site (jdbc.postgresql.org) and
> its mailing list, so I don't see why gborg needs to come into the picture
> at all. Simply put the CVS root on cvs.postgresql.org, so people that are
> used to checking out the pgsql module can simply replace that with the
> name of the JDBC driver module.

actually, we won't be getting rid of jdbc.postgresql.org, or odbc.* or
pgadmin.* ... what I've more looking at/for is the easy collaborrative
environment that the web-based frontend on gborg will/does provide ...
Barry decides he needs help, recruits something *he* trusts and adds him
in without having to go through anyone else ...

also, and Chris can correct me on this if I'm wrong, but I believe that
those that are "the developers" have the ability to do remote CVS for
their work anyway, don't they?

> Furthermore, considering that everyone that comes along can open his own
> gborg project, things will simply get lost in there. "Official" stuff
> should get more prominent treatment.

Actually, I can't really see this happening (the getting lost, aspect) ...
the only projects that tend to get 'lost' are those that are pretty much
dead anyway ... same with sourceforge, your 'busy projects' are more often
on the front page ... its the deead ones that you never see ...

> Just to make sure: You're not going to put the backend code into a gborg
> project, are you?

Damn, ya know, until you mentioned it, we hadn't considered it, but since
you did bring it up, we'll discuss and let you know *evil grin* ... but I
think five words come to mind ... "Not a hope in hell" :)