On 4/15/14, 11:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> On 4/14/14, 10:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> Yes. It probably won't be a huge change, but it will need a bit of code.
>
>> It might be more future-proof if the build farm just called make
>> check-world and used some other way
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 4/14/14, 10:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Yes. It probably won't be a huge change, but it will need a bit of code.
> It might be more future-proof if the build farm just called make
> check-world and used some other way to identify the individual tests in
> that ou
On 4/14/14, 10:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 04/14/2014 10:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>>> Add TAP tests for client programs
>> I assume the buildfarm would need to be taught about this?
>>
>>
>
>
> Yes. It probably won't be a huge change, but it will ne
On 04/14/2014 10:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 04/14/2014 10:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut writes:
Add TAP tests for client programs
I assume the buildfarm would need to be taught about this?
Yes. It probably won't be a huge change, but it will need a bit of code.
And
On 04/14/2014 10:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut writes:
Add TAP tests for client programs
I assume the buildfarm would need to be taught about this?
Yes. It probably won't be a huge change, but it will need a bit of code.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgs
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Add TAP tests for client programs
I assume the buildfarm would need to be taught about this?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.o
