Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> If it doesn't need to be in core, in certainly has zero need to be in
> contrib and can push to pgFoundry.

One advantage of having it in contrib is buildfarm testing, as indeed we
already found out ... although it's true that *keeping* it there now
that it passes probably won't teach us too much more.

But I think the argument that was being made was mostly that the Slony
and Skytools projects would find it easier to depend on a contrib module
than on something that has to be fetched separately from pgfoundry.
Now they could work around that by including copies of the pgfoundry
project in their own distributions, but then they have a collision
problem if someone tries to install both together. (I have no idea how
likely that is, though; it might not be a big problem in practice?)

regards, tom lane