On Thu, 9 May 2002, Iavor Raytchev wrote:
> Thanks Ross,
>
> This sounds like a resolution.
>
> > I'd suggest keeping a copy of pgaccess in the main tree, as well, and
> > pushing versions from the development CVS over on a regular basis.
>
> I am not a cvs expert. We will check this with Stanislav - our system
> administrator, when he is back from holiday on Monday. I am sure there
> should be an automated way of keeping things fresh.
>
> Who is the contact person for the PostgreSQL cvs?
> > Only bad thing would be to let the code in the main postgresql tree rot:
> > either we keep it fresh, or we ask to have it pulled.
>
> Well... as I said to Teo, Chris and Bartus when we started pgaccess.org - we
> need it and we start it. If we fall out of business and can not provide the
> server anymore - somebody else should take over. And they agreed to take the
> risk. Until we are alive and breathing - we will be doing it. And until we
> are doing it - it will be fresh and blooming.
From a PgSQL Project standpoint, pgaccess has always been included as a
way of increasing the overall distribution of the package as a valid GUI
interface ... all that has ever happened in the past is that when a new
release came out from Teo, Bruce has generally downloaded it and replaced
what we had in CVS ... there were no patches involved ... I don't see why
that has to change, does it?
If the pgaccess.org folk would like, I can provide them with a means of
being able to easily upload a new copy of each release to
ftp.postgresql.org, so that it can make use of the extensive distribution
system wthat has been developeed over the years ... just let me know ...
