Comment 32 for bug 1225

2007/4/18, Murray Cumming <email address hidden>:
>
> If you install Glom, it's fair to assume that you are likely to need
> this part of Glom's implementation some time. Asking for Postgres not to
> be installed for Glom is equivalent to asking for libgnomeprint not to
> be installed because you never want to print from Gnumeric. Wanting to
> save a few MB would not be a good enough reason to do that.

May be in your case it's true, but not in mine. Think in the scenery I
talked about before. A TPV alike environment.
The user are that, USERS, and only USE what i give then. The doesn't need to
create databases, they only need to USE what i give them.
That's why I NEED a glom without server.

Even in an office, if I have a sql server, I prefer to create some accounts
for the people who would need that (mainly developers or advanced users)
better than managing complains about local storages that they don't know how
to configure.

You might prefer a client-only version of Glom. I plan to produce one at
> some time, though embedded use seems the only worthwhile place for it.
> But at the moment, a Glom without postgres is a broken Glom.

There is no need for an independent client only. The actual glom can act as
a client. You only neet to not include postgresql by force.
If the packages are made the way I said before (a "glom" package who tell
the sistem to install glom-client (call it glom-gui if you prefer, the name
isn't really important) and postgresql, and a "glom-client that install only
the glom itself) you have the two options at the same time, making happy you
and the office users and, at the same time, we the special cases. That way
the unaware user who install "glom" will get the gui AND the postgresql
server, but the "experienced user" (or we that have special uses) can choose
to install the "glom-client" without the server.

There is no need to be one way or another, we can have both of them without
a single modification in the actual codebase of glom. Only changing the
packaging.

I do not deny that there is a problem with Ubuntu's installation of
> Glom. I'm trying to tell you that the problem is not in the
> implementation of Glom itself. The problem is that Ubuntu starts an
> instance that is not used.

No, the problem isn't in the start of services installed, it's in the way
glom is packaged, that is what I'm saing since mi first post.