Le 24/01/2011 10:49, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
>> Le 24/01/2011 09:43, Dave Page a écrit :
>>> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>>> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not sure I agree there. This is a huge list of files to be fixed to
>>>> have... nothing more. I'm also all for incremental commits as long as
>>>> they do something.
>>>
>>> Where "nothing more" == "wxWidgets 2.9 compatibility"?
>>>
>>
>> That's not what I understood from Peter's email because his patch
>> doesn't take care of OGL, which means we would have a somewhat broken
>> pgAdmin (no GQB, no graphical EXPLAIN).
>>
>>> That seems like a WIN to me.
>>>
>>
>> Complete 2.9 compatibility would be a win. And I confess I fail to see
>> why we should commit this patch. What is the added value for this patch?
>
> It is an *incremental* change on the way to 2.9 compatibility. Adding
> patches in an incremental fashion like this is quite normal (it's been
> done before on a number of occasions in PostgreSQL and pgAdmin) as it
> makes them much easier to review and commit, than huge monolithic
> patches. An incremental patch may not bring full compatibility, but it
> addresses a specific set of issues, and does so in a way that doesn't
> break the existing builds.
>
Fair enough.
--
Guillaume
http://www.postgresql.fr
http://dalibo.com
