Sun Apr 11 13:18:25 PDT 2010
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Slony 1.2.21 rc1 + 2.0.3 rc4 released
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Fixing a confused slony
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 12:59:15PM -0400, Steve Singer wrote: > Christopher Browne wrote: > > > There should be a "chmod" that takes place somewhat automatically; > > I don't want that to be an entry going onto some interminable > > checklist. > > Is there a reason why we don't want to just do a 'chmod +x' on the > version file in the cvs repo on the server? I can't really think of a good one, or even an example of any other project where this is not +x. > That why future checkouts/exports will have configure with +x ? Good idea :) Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david at fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter at gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Slony 1.2.21 rc1 + 2.0.3 rc4 released
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Fixing a confused slony
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list