Jon Franz wrote: > It could be helpful to create a mailing list just for this project, > since not all members of pg-hackers will/shall participate, and we > would probably flood this list quite a bit trying to figure out what > is the best way to implement a win32 port. Just like the > pg-replication list, this new list would be project specific. > > However, as an aside, I think the 'first best fit shall be commited' > approach is a _bad_ idea. Everyone (whos interested in the port) > agrees with the basic goals, and we will get a working system much > faster if we all work on a single solution: And not try to race each > other.
I think we have to be involved to prevent chaos when those patches arrive. > If the main pg developers do not want to bless a specific method/project > for the port, then the people interested should hash it out, before > hundreds of man-hours are wasted developing something that ends up not > being used. Debuging-into existence is a bad idea, as the single-night > example hints at (wether intentionaly or not) - with a proper plan we > should be able to create unit tests that can prove whether the methods > choosen are functioning well before we ever get a fully working > postmaster. Actually, don't we have a cygwin mailing list? Seems that would be a great location, except for the name. Maybe Marc can close the list and migrate them all to a new 'win32' list. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
