From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: pspp: Update to 0.10.0 Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 18:46:19 +0200 Message-ID: <87d1qer1no.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1459059892-31699-1-git-send-email-jmd@gnu.org> <20160327100004.383a9213@debian-netbook> <20160327071458.GA12887@jocasta.intra> <874mbrzuzt.fsf@gnu.org> <20160328074547.GA27567@jocasta.intra> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41871) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akaJ8-0004Z7-PO for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 12:46:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akaJ5-0008BQ-Jp for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 12:46:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160328074547.GA27567@jocasta.intra> (John Darrington's message of "Mon, 28 Mar 2016 09:45:47 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: John Darrington Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org John Darrington skribis: > On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 07:33:10PM +0200, Ludovic Court??s wrote: > John Darrington skribis: >=20=20=20=20=20=20 > > Postgres ships with a client interface library called libpq - usin= g it is optional > > in pspp. If you have it, it allows pspp to directly connect to po= stgres databases. >=20=20=20=20=20=20 > I guess the PostgreSQL dependency might be debatable since it would > probably significantly increase the closure size. Could you check ?= ??guix > size??? and decide whether adding this dependency is a good thing, b= ased > on its size/benefit ratio? :-) >=20=20=20=20=20=20 > For this reasons, most distos which ship postgres put the libpq &c in a s= eperate package. > Guix so far as I can see is the only one which does not. Should we split= postgres into > two (or more) outputs ? Why not, again depending on the cost/benefit ratio in terms of closure size and usability. Ludo=E2=80=99.