Re: Ready for beta yet?

Thanks Raphaël, Tomasz. Patch applied.

Regards Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr [mailto:blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr]
> Sent: 05 October 2005 17:46
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org; bogomips(at)post(dot)pl
> Subject: Re: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
>
> Dave,
>
> can you apply the following patch to the trunk ?
> This is the patch from Tomasz with blind corrections from my part.
> (not tested but should be ok, I'll use it to provide 1.4.0
> beta1 package)
>
> Cheers,
> Raphaël
>
>
> ----Message d'origine----
> >De: blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr
> >A: bogomips(at)post(dot)pl
> >Copie à: dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> >Sujet: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
> >Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 22:46:10 +0200
> >
> >
> >Hi Tomasz,
> >
> >----Message d'origine----
> >>Sujet: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Ready for beta yet?
> >>De: Tomasz Rybak <bogomips(at)post(dot)pl>
> >>A: blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr
> >>Copie à: dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> >>Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 21:24:33 +0200
> >>
> >>Dnia 03-10-2005, pon o godzinie 18:50 +0200,
> blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr
> >>napisa³(a):
> >>> Hi Tomasz, Dave and friends,
> >>>
> >>> first day to my new job and first day with an access to
> >>> the net since a long time.
> >>
> >>Good luck with new job.
> >
> >thanks, I'll try to keep the luck with me. :)
> >
> >
> >>> Tomasz, if you have some time to produce a merge between
> >>> what you provided and what I've fixed in official debian I'd
> >>> appreciate your help now I particularly think to the pgagent part
> >>> of the package which was not taken in consideration in 1.2.2 and
> >>> also the i18n relocation.
> >>>
> >>
> >>OK.
> >>Here are changes I made, applied to revision 4490.
> >>They are mostly changes made by you in official Debian package,
> >>but I made few additional.
> >
> >I had a quick look to your changes and it seems quite good,
> >although we must change some of them. Comments follow.
> >
> >
> >>For changelog, I put 1.4.0, because as I understand, we're trying
> >>to be ready for 1.4 release; I also put you name, as author of these
> >>changes. Feel free to put mine, if it's more appropriate.
> >
> >1.4.0 is ok but the package version should not be "-1". "-1" is
> >reserved for the first upload to official Debian. Unofficial packages
> >should never use version number greater or equal to 1.
> >For unofficial releases I generally use something like -0.1, -0.2,...
> >Take a look to the beginning of the changelog you will see what we
> >did with Andreas Tille before the first upload to Debian.
> That's a good
> >example (at least a functionnal one).
> >Concerning my name as the author, you should definitely put yours
> >(I'll correct this when providing a version for the svn
> [surely tomorrow])
> >That's your work and the least we can do is that you get your name
> >somewhere to thank you for your contribution.
> >
> >>In rules, line 16, instead of
> >>_pgsql_inc:="/usr/include/postgresql -I./include"
> >>I put calling of pg_config; such behaviour was mentioned
> >>in changelog for libpq-dev 8.0.3-13 as more proper now.
> >
> >yeah, alright with this. In fact that's what I ripped from Ubuntu
> >for official 1.2.2. So, this one is definitely ok.
> >
> >>I also created new variable CPPFLAGS, where I put -I./include
> >>taken from _pgsql_inc.
> >>Previous situation resulted in warnings from configure script,
> >>because instead of putting -I into _pgsql_inc, it was passed
> >>to script as parameter, which wasn't sure what to do with that.
> >>pgAdmin was being built successfully, but I decided to get
> >>rid of this warning.
> >>I also had to change a bit calling configure script in line 50,
> >>and add CPPFLAGS to it.
> >
> >Ok, I'll take a look at this. Maybe we can definitely remove that
> >old -I./include after all...
> >
> >
> >>I also changed directory from ui to i18n line 106 of file rules.
> >
> >Perfect.
> >
> >>Last change I made is adding pgagent and i18n files in
> pgadmin3.install.
> >
> >Ok. We'll need a man page for pgagent in a near future if we
> >want to upload the things as is for Official Debian.
> >I don't know if anybody has began to work on this... Dave ?
> >
> >>Changelog in attachment.
> >
> >thanks for this diff.
> >
> >>One remark.
> >>Why there are slony3 and slony3-data package?
> >>Both depend on each other, and from my point of view there
> >>is no need for them both; maybe it's good idea to merge them.
> >>However, I'm not experienced in Debian packages creating,
> >>and I don't know why split occurred, so I'll leave these two
> >>as they are, without changes. So it's up to you to decide what
> >>to do.
> >
> >I bet you refer to pgadmin3 and pgadmin3-data depending on each
> >other. This was first introduced by Andreas Tille and discussed later
> >with Peter Eisentraut and Noèl Koethe.
> >In pgadmin3 package case, the reason for such a split is mainly due
> >to the size of the documentation we provide.
> >In this pgadmin3-data package we try to put all the nonarch dependent
> >files and actually the PostgreSQL documentation. As it takes quite
> >some disk space it's useful to split this for the following reason:
> >- one non-arch package used by all the Debian archs prevents
> >duplication of files and so save space on the Debian archive
> >- as it saves disk space it also saves bandwidth between mirrors
> >You may say that this not really interesting to do so for a
> compressed
> >size of approx 1,5 Mo but if you multiply this by a large number of
> >package it may be worth doing it.
> >Last but not least, as pgadmin3-data contains documentation it should
> >be named -doc and not -data, however, this documentation is usefull
> >and/or needed for pgadmin3 to run well so it's not pure documentation
> >and is mandatory to install. That's why we named it -data
> and not -doc
> >and made the two packages depend exactly on each other.
> >That's why it's like this and I won't change it. :)
> >
> >Thanks for your work, I'll provide an update tomorrow and ask Dave
> >or Andreas (the Pflug one) to commit it.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Raphaël
> >
> >
> >---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> >TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
> >
>
>