| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta |
| Date: | 2010-04-30 15:08:20 |
| Message-ID: | 1272640100.24187.41.camel@fsopti579.F-Secure.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On fre, 2010-04-30 at 10:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> In the end, the main useful function that contrib serves is to provide
> examples of how to write Postgres extensions.
Maybe, but pg_migrator surely doesn't fit that. And neither does about
a third of the other contrib modules, IMO.
> Because of that, removing
> it as Peter suggests doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
contrib means many things to many people, and that's exactly the problem
in my mind: It doesn't mean anything in particular. If we were to
separate it into
- examples
- production-quality add-ons with small user base
- production-quality add-ons that everyone wants, but we keep them as
plugins because plugins are cool
- experimental code that we wanted to ship anyway
- (historically) differently licensed code
then these discussions would be much simpler.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-04-30 15:18:34 | Re: missing file in git repo |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-04-30 14:55:45 | Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta |