JDK1.7 support

I have committed support for building JDBC4.1 with the JDK 1.7 developer
preview to CVS.

Kris Jurka

-- Kris, are there any plans to port the project to use git?

This was sort of mentioned at pgeast. What is the upside ?

Dave Cramer

dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 5:50 AM, Valentine Gogichashvili
<valgog(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> -- Kris, are there any plans to port the project to use git?
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
>

On 1/04/2011 6:13 PM, Dave Cramer wrote:
> [git] was sort of mentioned at pgeast. What is the upside ?

The #1 biggest upside is Github. I love it, and I bet you will too if
you try it. Think CVSweb times a million, built on a distributed
revision control system that can handle push/pull requests, trivial
creation of private feature branches, etc. You won't want to go back to
using other systems.

Even if you don't mirror to GitHub, git still makes it MUCH nicer for
3rd parties to develop patches to PgJDBC, especially if those patches
take a while and need to track the PgJDBC mainline. Being able to create
a personal feature branch is great; being able to share it when you want
to is even better.

Frankly, I personally also just love git's locally cloned repository.
You forget what it's like doing an 'svn diff' or 'cvs diff' over
revisions or dates after a while, and just get used to using the history
and the tags in a way you wouldn't when there's all that annoying lag.

I follow the Glassfish server, and constantly wish their svn was at
least mirrored to git, because pulling changes is so much faster, and
working with the working copy is so much quicker and easier. Of course,
that's a truly gigantic codebase, so the downside in the case of
glassfish would be a horrific initial clone size. Not so much an issue
with PgJDBC.

--
Craig Ringer

Tech-related writing at http://soapyfrogs.blogspot.com/

On Fri, 1 Apr 2011, Valentine Gogichashvili wrote:

> Kris, are there any plans to port the project to use git?
>

Yes, eventually. CVS is certainly ancient and with the server having
moved to git, I see no reason for us not to follow. At the same time I
don't really feel any sense of urgency because CVS is still functional.
I'd say it would be a post 9.1 item to work on. If you followed the
amount of work it took the server team to get the cvs->git conversion the
way they wanted, it may not be as trivial as you'd hope.

Kris Jurka

> Even if you don't mirror to GitHub, git still makes it MUCH nicer for 3rd
> parties to develop patches to PgJDBC, especially if those patches take a
> while and need to track the PgJDBC mainline. Being able to create a personal
> feature branch is great; being able to share it when you want to is even
> better.

This is probably the biggest potential benefit for the project. I'm
not sure what effect it will have (if any) on contributions, but this
sort of thing is dead easy with github and still pretty easy with two
git repositories hosted on entirely different systems.

We're finally doing the last step of a prolonged svn-to-git migration
at Truviso and I've learned a thing or two about the migration
process. If the pgjdbc team decide to pull the trigger, I'll offer my
meager expertise to the endeavor.

---
Maciek Sakrejda | System Architect | Truviso

1065 E. Hillsdale Blvd., Suite 215
Foster City, CA 94404
(650) 242-3500 Main
www.truviso.com

Yes, I surely understand that it is not so easy, but if you believe Tom Lane and do not convert the whole history 100% it should be not such a big issue:

http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org/msg164883.html

-- Valentin Gogichashvili