From: | Barry Lind <barry(at)xythos(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Patrick Macdonald <patrickm(at)redhat(dot)com>, darcy(at)druid(dot)net |
Subject: | Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility |
Date: | 2002-02-07 02:20:08 |
Message-ID: | 3C61E458.2090904@xythos.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
In following this thread, one question that was raised in my mind is
what is the intended purpose of the contrib directory? I had thought
that the purpose was as a place to put code that was experimental, or
not stable enough to be in the main tree, but would someday when it
matures get included into the main tree. Obviousely if there are
different licenses this code couldn't ever be in the main tree. Is
contrib then just a dumping ground of code related to the postgresql
server (a kind of sourceforge for postgres)? I am sure the answer to
that question is no. But then I really don't understand what should or
should not be in contrib.
thanks,
--Barry
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
>
>>I do have concerns about including these six contrib modules in our
>>distribution, however. It could be argued that the terms of the GPL
>>forbid that.
>>
>
> That is one thing. Another concern is that it confuses the general
> public. People have certain expectations when it comes to PostgreSQL
> code, and if every little subdirectory has its own license it just becomes
> annoying.
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-02-07 02:36:07 | Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-02-07 00:51:14 | Re: Automatic transactions in psql |