Re: Help proposal for libgdamm

Hi,

Just would like to follow up on our previous conversation. The libgda
master CI was broken and finally got fixed recently. All test and
compilation should be ok. I tried to compile libgdamm and do see some
issues due to last-two-years activity in libgda. It may be a good idea
to setup a CI for libgdamm. I will try to play with that. Let me know
if you have a specific plan to move forward. 

Best,
-Pavlo.

On Thu, 2020-01-23 at 16:20 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
> Your help would be much appreciated. Actually, I had difficulty even
> building libgda.
> 
> On 23 Jan 2020 15:25, Pavlo Solntsev via gtkmm-list <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I saw some recent activities in libgdamm repo. However, I checked
> > and
> > it looks like the library can't be compiled because of changes in
> > libgda code. Would it be be possible to open issues for work that
> > needs
> > to be done? I can help with porting some code. For now, I am
> > cleaning
> > documentation for lilbgda and found that some API introduced in the
> > dev
> > version (6.0) can be obsolete. Technically, this is not obsolete,
> > since
> > we didn't have a stable version yet. For instance, a lot of DDL
> > operations were moved to the new GdaDB... module and having
> > redundant
> > API is not the best approach. Anyway, I would like to coordinate
> > work
> > on libgdamm if possible. Thanks.
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > gtkmm-list mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
> > 
> 
>