Willy-Bas Loos wrote:
> what would that mean?
> It´s all SQL, so what else is to be supported? Maybe shp2pgsql too? (i
> don´t see why, pgAdmin supports output to file (CSV) now, but no
> matching function backwards)
> Or would it mean collaborating with uDig (run by refractions btw), to
> provide a complete gis viewing experience? Sounds like that would only
> complicate things needlessly.
> Is anybody else out there interested in PostGIS support for pgAdmin?

I'm interested in supporting it, but if we're going to do it, we should
do it properly. If there really is nothing needed but to allow dumping
of shapes, then thats fine, but it doesn't seem like it would be all
(and I don't know PostGIS so can't really make an informed comment).

Mark; can you comment on what would be needed in pgAdmin to claim we
support PostGIS?

> And finally, would it be possible for us to create an add-on to
> pgAdmin ourselves and share it w/ the world? (e.g. the one i
> proposed). That is, without introducing upgrade possibilities.

There is no add-in functionality at the moment, though we have discussed
using the embeddable python interpreter to add something.

I'm happy to accept suitable patches to do what is required in the core
code though, provided they cover enough for us to claim we support
PostGIS, and not just odd bits of it.

/D

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster