On 24 February 2011 22:52, Dave Page wrote:
>> I added a ticket to work on this once we'll have some time.
>
> Why? Nobody ever asked for it before, and there are 101 other things
> that people have asked for that we haven't got to yet! Given the
> current lack of interest, I don't think we should
Le 25/02/2011 00:48, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> Le 24/02/2011 23:52, Dave Page a écrit :
>> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>> wrote:
>>> Le 24/02/2011 21:08, Massa, Harald Armin a écrit :
[...]
is there any deep technical reason why pgAdmin does not support
c
Le 24/02/2011 23:52, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> wrote:
>> Le 24/02/2011 21:08, Massa, Harald Armin a écrit :
>>> [...]
>>> is there any deep technical reason why pgAdmin does not support
>>> connections via service-names corresponding to pg_service.
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
wrote:
> Le 24/02/2011 21:08, Massa, Harald Armin a écrit :
>> [...]
>> is there any deep technical reason why pgAdmin does not support
>> connections via service-names corresponding to pg_service.conf, or is
>> it just sth in the level "nobody a
Le 24/02/2011 21:08, Massa, Harald Armin a écrit :
> [...]
> is there any deep technical reason why pgAdmin does not support
> connections via service-names corresponding to pg_service.conf, or is
> it just sth in the level "nobody asked for it before / we did not get
> around to do it" ?
>
The l
Hello!
is there any deep technical reason why pgAdmin does not support
connections via service-names corresponding to pg_service.conf, or is
it just sth in the level "nobody asked for it before / we did not get
around to do it" ?
Harald
--
GHUM GmbH
Harald Armin Massa
Spielberger Straße 49
704
