Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement
Date
Msg-id 8772.1115131383@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Am Montag, 2. Mai 2005 20:14 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
>> I posted this compromise and no one replied so I thought everyone was OK
>> with it.  It gets it into CVS, but has a separate compile stage to deal
>> with the recursive dependency problem.

> How will a "separate compile stage" work for actually building, say, RPM or 
> Debian packages?  The only way I can see is wrapping up the PostgreSQL 
> distribution tarball a second time as a "plphp" source package and build from
> there, which seems quite weird.

I think the idea is that plphp would be in our CVS, but would not be
shipped as part of the main tarball, rather as its own separate tarball.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: bitmap scan and explain analyze
Next
From: "Dave Held"
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature freeze date for 8.1