From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Psql_General (E-mail)" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core? |
Date: | 2005-04-02 05:41:04 |
Message-ID: | 200504020741.05675.peter_e@gmx.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> PLs are sufficiently tightly tied to the core that it's probably
> easier to maintain them as part of our core CVS than otherwise.
> (Ask Joe Conway about PL/R.
As a matter of fact, let's ask him.
> Thomas Hallgren is probably not that
> happy about maintaining pl/java out of core, either.
And let's ask him, too.
I'm not convinced that PLs are more tied to the core than say OpenFTS,
and if we can't maintain that kind of thing externally, then this whole
extension thing sounds like a failure to me.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2005-04-02 05:50:54 | Re: Debugging deadlocks |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-04-02 05:38:19 | Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2005-04-02 05:50:54 | Re: Debugging deadlocks |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-04-02 05:38:19 | Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core? |