Re: inclusions WAS: Increased company involvement

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: inclusions WAS: Increased company involvement
Date: 2005-05-04 11:18:54
Message-ID: 4278AF9E.2010005@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

>"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>
>>As for CVS - if we can't do development the way we want using it then it's
>>time to replace it.
>>
>>
>
>CVS's capabilities (or lack of same) are completely unrelated to the
>matter in hand. What we are talking about is packaging, ie what should
>sensibly go out in the same shipped tarball.
>
>
>
I agree. I was responding to Josh's suggestion that CVS limitations were
driving policy, but your response is more apposite ;-)

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rob Butler 2005-05-04 12:46:30 pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Previous Message Kaare Rasmussen 2005-05-04 09:34:31 Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1