Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely

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.

--
Peter Geoghegan