From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
Date: | 2005-05-05 16:20:25 |
Message-ID: | 24328.1115310025@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, 5 May 2005, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Can you have the same tags across different modules in the same CVS
>> server? If so, that would work.
> I believe that I can made a 'meta module' that, if I checked it out, would
> include all sub-modules, and that I can tag/branch appropriately ... if
> not, its just a matter of looping through each at the same time, a little
> more work, but not much more ...
Probably not worth the trouble compared to just putting them as
separate top-level directories in the checkout tree. Our last
experiment with multiple modules didn't go very well.
One thought here --- would we also separate out the documentation for
them? That would have some negative effects (make the documentation
less seamless) but I'm not sure we'd have any choice.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-05-05 16:23:44 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-05-05 16:17:55 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-05-05 16:23:44 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-05-05 16:17:55 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |