| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
| Date: | 2005-05-03 18:47:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20050503184720.GG30011@ns.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
* Marc G. Fournier (scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org) wrote:
> On Tue, 3 May 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >We could break out all of the pls at that point? Where if you downloaded
> >postgresql-opt you would get plPHP, plPerl etc...
>
> Optimally, you would get rid of -opt altogether, and leave it as the
> individual pl(s) ... the main purposes of the smaller tar balls is so that
> someone building a port (*BSDs) or a package (other OSs) would only need
> to download the component that applies to them, and someone installing
> from source, similar ...
I tend to like this approach. I think it'd also make it possible to
have seperate Debian packages for the different languages more easily,
which may be useful since they could more easily have different
maintainers too. It'd also mean that you wouldn't have to have
languages installed (or at least, on the system, perhaps not
createlang'd) if you didn't want them, etc, etc.
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-05-03 18:49:42 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2005-05-03 18:43:41 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-03 18:48:20 | Re: Bogus assertion in multixact.c? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-03 18:44:04 | Re: Bogus assertion in multixact.c? |