Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Date: 2008-02-07 17:48:15
Message-ID: 47AB445F.50704@hagander.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 14:00:33 -0300
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Joshua D. Drake escribió:
>>
>>> I am not arguing any particular solution but home brewing a
>>> solution so people can stay on what is definitely a dying SCM is
>>> dumb. There are so many tools available to us that we *don't* have
>>> to modify, bend, break or if you like, improve that any argument
>>> outside of, "We are used to CVS" is just hand waving and that
>>> argument is sad.
>> Actually, in using Subversion I've found it broken enough that a
>> migration to it does not offer that much of an advantage over staying
>> with CVS.
>
> I repeat. I am not arguing a particular solution. I am arguing against
> creating more internal infrastructure and the relevant support
> requirements when other solutions exist.

Just so we can stop talking about this, it does seem it works with CVS -
it's just not necessarily documented that way...

//Magnus

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aidan Van Dyk 2008-02-07 17:53:38 Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2008-02-07 17:33:52 Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan