Re: [PATCH v16] GSSAPI encryption support
От | Nico Williams |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH v16] GSSAPI encryption support |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20180611205245.GB23356@localhost обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH v16] GSSAPI encryption support (Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 01:31:12PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 06/11/2018 01:13 PM, Nico Williams wrote: > >Well, all the free CIs like Travis and Appveyor do it this way. You > >don't have to *use* it just because the .yml files are in the source > >tree. But you have to have the .yml files in the source tree in order > >to use these CIs. It'd be nice to be able to point somewhere else for > >them, but whatever, that's not something we get much choice in at this > >time. > > That's not true, at least for Appveyor (can't speak about travis - I have no > first hand experience). For appveyor, you can supply a custom appveyor.yml > file, which can be a complete URL. In fact, if you use a plain git source as > opposed to one of the managed git services it supports, you have to do it > that way - it ignores an appveyor.yml in your repo. I found this out the > very hard way over the last few days, and they very kindly don't warn you at > all about this. OK, that's.. nice, maybe, I guess, but I'd still want version control for these yml files -- why not have them in-tree? I'd rather have them in-tree unless there's a good reason not to have them there. In other projects I definitely find it better to have these files in-tree. Nico --
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: