Re: Allowing extensions to find out the OIDs of their member objects

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

Tom> I'm not exactly following this concern. I wasn't imagining that
Tom> we'd assign each individual OID ourselves, but rather give out
Tom> blocks of OIDs. Admittedly, the blocks can't be huge, but it
Tom> doesn't seem to me that this'd create an impossible burden for
Tom> either us or extension developers.

Even that's not acceptable. There is no reason why someone should not be
able to create extensions freely without us ever knowing about them or
needing to.

In fact I suggest that "there shall be no registries of third parties"
be made a formal project policy.

Tom> We could also reserve some range of OIDs for "local extensions",
Tom> whereby people who didn't intend to publish their extensions for
Tom> widespread use could just use some of those OIDs rather than
Tom> having to ask for a public assignment.

That's not acceptable either; local extensions have a way of becoming
global.

Seriously, this whole idea is a lazy hack. Fixed assignments? really?

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)