-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
>> Doing this without DBI is going to be ten times harder than doing it >> with DBI. Are we really sure that's not a viable option? > In the buildfarm? Yes, I think so. The philosophy of the buildfarm is > that it should do what you would do yourself by hand. > > And adding DBI as a requirement for running a buildfarm member would be > a significant extra barrier to entry, ISTM. (I am very fond of DBI, and > use it frequently, BTW) What about something less than a requirement then? If you have it great, you can run these extra tests. If you don't have it, no harm, no foul. We could even bundle DBI and DBD::Pg to ensure that the minimum versions are there. All the prerequisites should be in place for 99% of the machines: a C compiler and Perl are the biggies, and I can't see any buildfarm members running without those. :) - -- Greg Sabino Mullane g...@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201001071014 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEAREDAAYFAktF+ucACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjYOgCglyLIyGCr60og+iQSnyRgkowd +lYAnRDjPe/XxC7gb9OBPdpZlqU0wncK =kPIR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
