Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dustin Sallings
Subject Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)
Date
Msg-id 808AC9F0-7E97-11D8-9C78-000393CFE6B8@spy.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
Responses Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)
Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mar 25, 2004, at 1:21, Neil Conway wrote:

> I think the lack of good Win32 support (unless rectified before the 
> release of 7.5) is a pretty major problem with Arch -- that alone 
> might be sufficient to prevent us from adopting it.
I don't do Windows, but my understanding is that tla is as well 
supported on Windows as postgres is.
The design is fundamentally easy enough that a Windows user who cares 
could probably make a more suitable port for Windows than the UNIX guys 
are interested in making.  I've seen such discussions on the list.

-- 
Dustin Sallings



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Nested transaction proposal - take N (N > 2)
Next
From: Dustin Sallings
Date:
Subject: Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)