Re: Final /contrib cleanup -- yes/no?

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Final /contrib cleanup -- yes/no?
Date: 2008-11-07 07:54:51
Message-ID: 4913F44B.90308@hagander.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> Eh, Tom has a point. If we build module loading for 8.5, we shouldn't
>> change the functionality in the interim for 8.4. Annoying as it is.
>
> The main reason I'm concerned about it is that when we do modules
> (which I certainly hope happens for 8.5) we would then have two
> different old behaviors to worry about compatibility with.
> I'm afraid of painting ourselves into a corner.

I personally find the current way *very* annoying, because it keeps
sticking things in public when I don't want to - yes, that's because I
keep forgetting to edit the scripts, but it sucks that I should have to.

But. I think this argument is a winner. *IF* we get modules, which we
have been talking about for a long time, in the next version. But there
seems to be more interest now than before, so I think the probability is
better than it used to be ;-) Which means the argument for not creating
"yet another way" wins in my book.

//Magnus

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matteo Beccati 2008-11-07 08:21:03 Re: regression in analyze
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2008-11-07 07:51:42 Re: Distinct types