Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely

On 05/29/2015 02:08 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>> A. Extra commands and tools which aren't considered general enough, or
>> reliable enough, to be included by default, e.g. pg_standby, pgbench and
>> vacuumlo.
>>
>> B. Developer tools, like spi, start-scripts, and oid2name.
>>
>> C. "Core Extensions", which fall into three further groups:
>> C1: encryption extensions we can't include in core
>> for legal reasons (pg_crypto)
>> C2: example extensions which show useful things about
>> how to build an extension
>> C3: Admin extensions which are not core because they carry
>> risks (e.g. pgstattuple, auto_explain)
>> C4: Extensions which are generally useful, used, and
>> maintained with Postgres (e.g. hstore, citext)
>
> I always liked the idea of organizing contrib along these lines.
>
> I know that I will never be successful in convincing people to remove,
> say, contrib/isn, which is total garbage, but the next best thing is
> to categorize it in a way that sets expectations very low.

Well, contrib/isn is still useful (I use it). But there's no good
reason it couldn't be on pgxn.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com