Re: plPHP and plRuby

From: "Marcin Mank" <marcin(dot)mank(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plPHP and plRuby
Date: 2006-07-25 16:23:04
Message-ID: 009401c6b006$9bdc0d60$0c67a8c0@maniek
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> Ultimately, I really think we need something akin to CPAN so that we
> don't have to bundle all kinds of stuff in the core package. In the
> meantime, adding PLs that we can is better than not, but we do need to
> be mindful of the impression it might leave on users. A page that lists
> the status of all PLs (specifically why they're not included if they're
> not) would be a good thing to have.

I as a user think that there should be a clear distinction of what is a
supported extension, and what is an unsupported extension .

With >100 projects on pgfoundry, 150 or so on gborg, it is hard to tell
which ones one can trust, and not everybody wants to beta-test on their
production data (especially for things that touch the core engine directly).
Maybe there should be a set of requirements fulfilling of which could get a
project a special 'blessing' from the Postgresql community?

Greetings
Marcin Mank

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2006-07-25 16:26:27 Re: Forcing current WAL file to be archived
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2006-07-25 16:21:07 Re: root/administartor user check option.