Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> But packaging them as separately buildable tarballs that depend only
>> on the installed core fileset (headers + pgxs) seems a fine idea.

> I really can't see doing this without a better (i.e. CPAN / emerge / ports -
> like ) build system. Mind you, I'd really like such a build system, but if
> we require users to manually download several separate tarballs and untar
> them in exactly the right spot in the source tree, we're adding a bunch of
> extra effort for both users and packagers.

Uh, that's not exactly what is being proposed. It would be a separate
tarball that you could untar wherever you felt like, because it would
not depend on the core source tree at all --- only on the files
installed by a previous build of the core.

I think Marc just suggested having all the PLs in one such tarball,
rather than one for each which is what I was envisioning. That would
probably fix the "too many things to download" issue. Offhand it
doesn't seem like it makes the what-order-do-I-build-my-RPMs in problem
any worse. It would complicate the license issue though. For ease of
labeling you really want all the code in a given tarball to have the
same license, and we couldn't expect to have that for all the PLs.

regards, tom lane