| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: plPHP and plRuby |
| Date: | 2006-07-24 16:49:57 |
| Message-ID: | 20060724164957.GI5223@surnet.cl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
> >Neil,
> >
> >>(FWIW, I'd be fairly comfortable hacking on PL/Ruby, as I have some
> >>prior experience with Ruby and its C API.)
> >
> >Well, if you're willing to be a maintainer, that removes a major roadblock.
> >
>
> O.k. so we don't loose this. Do we want to work on PL/Ruby in core or not?
Side question -- is it plRuby or PL/Ruby? We should be consistent. I
just noticed the top-level README file has all the wrong names -- what
is "pl/c" for starters? Or plPgsql? We've _never_ used those names.
Also some time ago I convinced you that the actual name for the PHP
stuff was PL/php and you agreed. Yet I see on the README the name
plPHP which manages to not get a single letter correctly capitalized!
I'll patch the README later, but consider this a call for future
consistency ... (I'd like to know what do we call "pl/c" though. It's
just C, right?)
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-07-24 16:58:29 | Re: plPHP and plRuby |
| Previous Message | Bort, Paul | 2006-07-24 16:46:54 | Re: Adding a pgbench run to buildfarm |