Re: meson "experimental"?

On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 12:56 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
> Experimental is probably too harsh a word now.
>
> But it doesn't have feature parity with configure/make yet (for example,
> no .bc files), so I wouldn't recommend it for production or packaging
> builds.

That's unfortunate. :-(

> Then, there are issues like [0]. If it's experimental, then this is
> like, meh, we'll fix it later. If not, then it's a bug.

This feels like a case where I'd have to read the entire thread to
understand what the issue is.

> More generally, I don't think we've really done a comprehensive check of
> how popular extensions build against pgxs-from-meson. Packagers that
> make their production builds using meson now might be signing up for a
> long tail of the unknown.

That's a fair point, and I don't know what to do about it, but it
seems like something that needs to be addressed.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com