On Feb 27, 2014, at 12:17 PM, Dave Page wrote:
> Thanks - I've pushed it to the FTP site; it should all sync up within
> an hour or so.
Awesome, thank you!
David
--
Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgr
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:12 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2014, at 2:11 PM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>> I've created a test tarball for the release - can you take a look and
>> make sure I didn't break anything please?
>>
>> http://developer.pgadmin.org/~dpage/pgAgent-3.4.0-Source.tar.gz
>
On Feb 25, 2014, at 2:11 PM, Dave Page wrote:
> I've created a test tarball for the release - can you take a look and
> make sure I didn't break anything please?
>
> http://developer.pgadmin.org/~dpage/pgAgent-3.4.0-Source.tar.gz
Looks great, I was able to update our RPM spec pretty easily.
Th
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 9:23 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>>> Hey Dave, do you have an ETA for 3.4.0?
>>
>> Hoping to find time this week...
>
> Excellent, thank you!
OK, so I think I got things as I want them. I tweaked the extension
code so we
On Feb 25, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Dave Page wrote:
>> Hey Dave, do you have an ETA for 3.4.0?
>
> Hoping to find time this week...
Excellent, thank you!
D
--
Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/m
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:35 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 9:09 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>>> Also, I need to get our internal RPM updated. Do you think a new version
>>> will be released soon? If not, I can add a patch to our current RPM.
>>
>> I guess I might have to - there's
On Feb 11, 2014, at 9:09 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>> Also, I need to get our internal RPM updated. Do you think a new version
>> will be released soon? If not, I can add a patch to our current RPM.
>
> I guess I might have to - there's another fix in there that Regina Obe
> was asking for the other
On Feb 13, 2014, at 2:34 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> That's what I didn't look into yet - and really just implies that the
> spec (by which I assume you mean the control file) should only have
> "3" as the version number doesn't it?
Yes, that would work, too. I personally like to always use the same
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:20 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 2:21 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>> Much as PostgreSQL only changes catalogs and on disk format in major
>> releases, pgAgent only changes its schema in X releases (in the X.Y.Z
>> numbering scheme). My point is that there
On Feb 12, 2014, at 2:21 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> Much as PostgreSQL only changes catalogs and on disk format in major
> releases, pgAgent only changes its schema in X releases (in the X.Y.Z
> numbering scheme). My point is that there is no need to have upgrade
> scripts from 3.3.0 - 3.4.0 or even
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:50 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 9:16 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>> I actually removed the .0 because there aren't supposed to be any
>> schema changes in a point release (in fact, there aren't even supposed
>> to be in anything but a major release). I th
On Feb 11, 2014, at 9:16 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> I actually removed the .0 because there aren't supposed to be any
> schema changes in a point release (in fact, there aren't even supposed
> to be in anything but a major release). I thought I removed it from
> the filename as well, but clearly miss
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:14 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 9:09 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>> I guess I might have to - there's another fix in there that Regina Obe
>> was asking for the other day.
>
> Great thank you. Suggested quick patch: add the ".0" to the version comment
>
On Feb 11, 2014, at 9:09 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> I guess I might have to - there's another fix in there that Regina Obe
> was asking for the other day.
Great thank you. Suggested quick patch: add the ".0" to the version comment in
sql/pgagent--unpackaged--3.4.0.sql:
--- a/sql/pgagent--unpackage
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:07 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 6:42 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>> Thanks - patches applied, with minor typo fixes.
>
> Great, thanks.
>
> Will this be released as 3.3.1 rather than 3.3.0? If so,
> sql/pgagent--unpackaged--3.3.0.sql should be renamed.
On Feb 11, 2014, at 6:42 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> Thanks - patches applied, with minor typo fixes.
Great, thanks.
Will this be released as 3.3.1 rather than 3.3.0? If so,
sql/pgagent--unpackaged--3.3.0.sql should be renamed.
Also, I need to get our internal RPM updated. Do you think a new versi
Thanks - patches applied, with minor typo fixes.
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 5:34 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2014, at 5:52 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>>> I changed it to exclude the five default classes by name rather than ID,
>>> which should be cleaner.
>>
>> Those are really just defau
On Jan 30, 2014, at 5:52 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>> I changed it to exclude the five default classes by name rather than ID,
>> which should be cleaner.
>
> Those are really just defaults - users may well want to edit them to
> their own requirements.
Then I think this is the correct approach. We
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:50 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jan 16, 2014, at 5:39 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>
>> I hope to finish it up tomorrow. One quick question now, though: Do end
>> users ever add records to pga_jobclass? Or are those five records supposed
>> to be set in stone?
>
> I
On Jan 29, 2014, at 12:30 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> No, sorry - looks like I missed your last email. I'll try to look
> today, but may not be able to as I'm pretty busy. Otherwise it'll
> probably be next week I'm afraid, due to FOSDEM.
Got it, thanks!
David
--
Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 8:52 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jan 17, 2014, at 10:50 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>
>> I think this is a relatively clean way to go. I'm wondering, though, whether
>> the extension will be needed on PostgreSQL servers where pgAgent itself
>> isn't installed. Might
On Jan 17, 2014, at 10:50 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> I think this is a relatively clean way to go. I'm wondering, though, whether
> the extension will be needed on PostgreSQL servers where pgAgent itself isn't
> installed. Might it be worthwhile to also release an extension that just
> cont
On Jan 13, 2014, at 9:29 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> The FindPG cmake module in cmake/ already uses pg_config, so you're fine
> there.
Thanks. I’ve been working on it the last couple of days over here:
https://github.com/theory/pgagent/compare/extension
I hope to finish it up tomorrow. One quick
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 5:13 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jan 13, 2014, at 1:30 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>> PGXS cannot be used - it doesn't support Windows.
>
> Okay. What about pg_config or something equivalent? I think I just need to
> know where to put the *.sql and .control files.
The Fi
On Jan 13, 2014, at 1:30 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> PGXS cannot be used - it doesn't support Windows.
Okay. What about pg_config or something equivalent? I think I just need to know
where to put the *.sql and .control files.
David
--
Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postg
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 10:01 PM, David E. Wheeler
wrote:
> PGAdmin Hackers,
>
> I’d like to add code to pgAgent so that its schema could be installed via a
> CREATE EXTENSION statement. This would greatly simplify deployment for us. In
> private correspondence, Dave Page suggested that CMake be
26 matches
Mail list logo
