It could be helpful to create a mailing list just for this project,
since not all members of pg-hackers will/shall participate, and we
would probably flood this list quite a bit trying to figure out what
is the best way to implement a win32 port. Just like the
pg-replication list, this new list would be project specific.
However, as an aside, I think the 'first best fit shall be commited'
approach is a _bad_ idea. Everyone (whos interested in the port)
agrees with the basic goals, and we will get a working system much
faster if we all work on a single solution: And not try to race each
other.
If the main pg developers do not want to bless a specific method/project
for the port, then the people interested should hash it out, before
hundreds of man-hours are wasted developing something that ends up not
being used. Debuging-into existence is a bad idea, as the single-night
example hints at (wether intentionaly or not) - with a proper plan we
should be able to create unit tests that can prove whether the methods
choosen are functioning well before we ever get a fully working
postmaster.
~Jon Franz
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>Jan Wieck wrote:
>
>>>>What I don't want to happen is two Win32 projects contributing duplicate
>>>>code at the same time. It is a waste when they could have combined
>>>>their efforts.
>>>>
>>>IMHO, that is actually their problem ... without meaning to sound crass
>>>about it, but its not like we haven't discussed it extensively here, and
>>>openly ... hell, we've even tried to break down the whole project into
>>>smaller components to make the whole easier to merge in :)
>>>
>>The problem with this kind of project is that you have a big stumbling
>>block at the beginning, which has to be done before you can rollout and
>>integrate the help of developers scattered around the globe. This was
>>the case with the foreign key project, where the trigger queue and one
>>set of triggers where working, and then Stephan did all the others and I
>>forgot who else helped to do the utility commands and CREATE TABLE
>>syntax and tried to decrypt the SQL definitions? In the Windows port
>>case it is to get it as far that you at least can fire up a postmaster,
>>get past the startup process, connect to the database and do a few
>>queries before the thing blows up. Before this everybody has exactly the
>>same problem, "It doesn't startup", so the likelyhood of everyone
>>stomping over each others work every single night is about 99.9%!
>>
>
>Yes, but it doesn't prevent discussion. I think open implementation
>discussion will help. I am suggesting this to everyone, not just Jan.
>I have been in private discussion with others too.
>
