On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 10:36 -0500, David Vaillancourt wrote:
> Dave,
>
> Thanks for the quick feedback. I'm really surprised that people who use
> VCS for their 'normal' code, wouldn't see a use for the same when it
> comes to DB Schema/DDL versions.
Oh I think we do. But I guess it would be better to use the VCS
directly, and not through pgAdmin.
> In any case, my goal is not to add the functionality directly to
> PGAdmin, but rather create a plugin for PGadmin to use.
>
OK. No problem with that.
> As I mentionned earlier, the extent of the modifications to PGadmin
> would be to extend the plugin framework to allow a tighter coupling
> between plugins and PGadmin.
Depends on what you really want to do. I'm afraid it'll be a lot of
work.
> I guess maintaining a plugin is different from maintaining yet another
> feature in the existing PGAdmin code, correct me if i'm wrong.
>
Yeah, but you're on both sides here. To be able to code your plugin, you
need to enhance the plugin architecture. Meaning more code into pgAdmin.
I'm not opposed to it, just say that it's not only writing a plugin.
> Finally, since no one wanted to use the VCS feature in PGadmin, what do
> teams of developers use to track versions of Schemas (Tables, Views,
> Procedures...)?
VCS directly.
> Do most developers simply not use any? Or do the 'hack' their own? I'd
> be surprised if they used proprietary tools ...
>
Well, I'm afraid most developers/DBAs don't use any VCS for their
schema. After seeing lots of them through my day work, I'll only see one
or two using a VCS. Which means a really low percentage.
--
Guillaume
http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info
http://www.dalibo.com
PostgreSQL Sessions #3: http://www.postgresql-sessions.org