RE: [HACKERS] connection troubles

On Thu, 5 Feb 1998, Meskes, Michael wrote:

> Could we please add the ODBC driver to the source tree? I think it would
> look much better if we distribute a 'complete' system.

	src/interfaces/odbc ... been there for a couple of weeks now :)
Julie has direct access to the source repository, and, like Peter, sort of
has to review any patches applied to it...

> Michael
> 
> --
> Dr. Michael Meskes, Project-Manager    | topsystem Systemhaus GmbH
> meskes@topsystem.de                    | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20
> meskes@debian.org                      | 52146 Wuerselen
> Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire!             | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44
> Use Debian GNU/Linux!                  | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	The Hermit Hacker [SMTP:scrappy@hub.org]
> > Sent:	Wednesday, February 04, 1998 7:59 PM
> > To:	Julia Anne Case
> > Cc:	pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
> > Subject:	Re: [HACKERS] connection troubles
> > 
> > On Wed, 4 Feb 1998, Julia Anne Case wrote:
> > 
> > > Quoting The Hermit Hacker (scrappy@hub.org):
> > > > Julie...
> > > > 
> > > > 	Will PostODBC be v6.3 tested in the next little while?  I know
> > > > there have been *alot* of changes to v6.3 as far as authentication
> > is
> > > > concerned, which might prove a problem once we release...
> > > > 
> > > 	I just brought down the latest snapshot to my Sparc/Linux
> > > machine...  I'll let you know how it works out...  Could take a
> > little
> > > while to compile it's just a IPX laptop...
> > 	
> > 
> > 	I don't have any knowledge of ODBC, but would it help if I setup
> > and maintained a (reasonably) current server that you can connect
> > remotely
> > too for testing?  I'll do periodic recompile/installs of it so that it
> > stays up to date?  I'd like to see the ODBC as rock solid as possible
> > before the 1st, in accordance with v6.3 specs, and if it means doing
> > this,
> > its a cheap price to pay :)
> > 
> > 	Peter...would this help any with the JDBC stuff too, or are you
> > okay with that one?
> > 
> > 
> > 
>