On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 05:04:50PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote: > On 20/09/13 15:49, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 02:47:39PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:20:38PM +0200, Paul Wise wrote: > >>> It is also impossible to patch the binary format unlike SQL. > >> Interesting. For the first time, I've realised there can be a clash between > >> "preferred form for modification" and "preferred form for use". > > > > I mean, not really, right? > > > > If I want to use a .so, I want the ELF, but I want to modify it in C > > > > > > This just means we ship the prefered form for use (this binary kruft) > > but ship the preferred form for modification in the source. > > The rules file could apply changes if required, pg_restore | something | > pg_dump again. > > The current version of the postbooks-schema-* packages are now in > collab-maint git. They simply install these files to > /usr/share/postbooks-schema but make no attempt to load them into PostgreSQL > > In this case, it is a client-server solution. There is no guarantee the > client code (package: postbooks) runs on the same host as the database > (packages postgresql and postbooks-schema-quickstart). Maybe the user > even has some Windows clients too. So we have no easy way to > synchronize changes to the client package and the database. > > If somebody wants to create any indexes in the database, details can go > in README.Debian. The administrator can then choose how to use it. > > However, if the package is formally rejected by the FTP masters then I > will be happy to change it to ASCII SQL if required. Please include the source / preferred form for modification in the source, and create this postgres thing from that. Cheers, Paul -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org> : :' : Proud Debian Developer `. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature