Re: Various issues - Mailing list pgadmin-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Michel POURE [mailto:jm.poure@freesurf.fr]
> Sent: 12 April 2002 11:42
> To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] Various issues
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Right now, I am too bust to work on pgAdmin2. Feel free to
> pick-up any issue I
> should be working on (if need to have it done quickly):
> - Handle two separate connexions (one for schema, another for
> data queries). The user should be able to define
> client_encoding for each connexion.

Is this really required now? (Considering that multibyte just isn't going to
work with VB6 anyway unless we can get some better controls)

> - Add pseudo ALTER DROP COLUM (this should not be difficult
> using pgSchema). I will be back on the project as soon as possible.

Shouldn't be required. There is much discussion about this on pgsql-hackers
at the moment, and it has been acknowledged that acceptance of patches has
be too strict in the past. I think DROP COLUMN will almost certainly be in
7.3 now.

> 3) KDE3 is marvelous
> I now use KDE3 which is a very nice environment. I tried
> writing some code in kDevelop. It seems possible to write
> code fast... Therefore I am still asking myself ***why***we
> should continue develop pgAdmin on Windows...

I did pose the question recently about a move to C# for primarily this
reason. Most responses indicated that people would *not* be happy if we did
this :-(.

> In my humble opinion, KDE needs a real database abstraction
> layer (like
> pgSchema) with a multi-vendor interface. The only solution
> today is Gnome libgda. Unfortunately, libgda is not
> well-written. A good abstraction layer needs inheritence
> (C++, not C) and XML to handle specfic features of each
> database provider.
>
> Secondly, KDE3, Konqueror and KDevelop would probably welcome
> a pgAdmin port. This would immediatly give us thousands of
> users. So why bother with Windows?
>
> Thirdly, qt3 applications can be compiled under Windows. And
> KDE3 is beeing ported to Windows using Cygwin. You can be
> sure it is not a year before we can use KDE3 under WIndows and MacOSX.

Yes, but qt requires coding in C/C++. If I have to rewrite 30-40K lines of
VB code to C, I can see that becoming more like 100-150K lines. VB does have
limitations, but no-one can deny that it is very good for building
applications quickly. The beauty of C# is:

1) Despite 8 or more years tinkering with C, I already feel more comfortable
with C# after a few weeks.
2) Whilst not quite as rapid as VB, it is definitely faster to build
applications than C/C++.

I very much hear what you're saying Jean-Michel, and agree with the
sentiment, however, primarily it will be me doing the coding I imagine so my
main priority will be ensuring that *I* am comfortable with whatever we
choose.

Regards, Dave.