| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely |
| Date: | 2015-06-04 18:01:22 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobcZ8YHeY=L-Z6pRpane7iMZXZERjQuiSQ_wAZiamgFjA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> I think it's because there are some things we want to include in the
>> core distribution without baking them irrevocably into the server.
>
> I have mentioned before isn't really what this discussion is about. Stephen
> Frost and I even went through the entire list of modules of what should and
> should not be included.
>
>> Which, IMV, is 100% reasonable.
>
> Nobody is arguing with that.
Well then I am confused.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-06-04 18:22:22 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2015-06-04 17:57:21 | Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely |