Re: Ready for beta yet?

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