Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Date
Msg-id 20750.1202345935@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan  (Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc>)
Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> O.k. I am not too interested in starting a whole war here (again) but
> for the record, we have what appears to be a perfectly working
> capability to move from cvs to svn. So *if* review board is something
> we really like, the SCM should not be the barrier.

I believe the compromise that's been reached for the moment is that
the core SCM will remain CVS, because everybody's favorite other SCM
can import from CVS but not necessarily from somebody else's favorite
other SCM.  So a diff tool that doesn't work with CVS isn't going to be
especially useful for us.

I would imagine that the problem is mostly a lack of round tuits,
and that if we really fell in love with review board we could probably
teach it to handle diffs against CVS (especially seeing that the rest
of it besides post-review already works with CVS, supposedly).

So, again, the question is has anyone really used it?  Is it the
best thing since sliced bread, or not so much?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Page-at-a-time Locking Considerations
Next
From: Mark Mielke
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan