Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:

>
> FWIW, I don't mind which one we put in core and which one we put out of
>> core. But I like Joshua's idea of getting rid of contribs and pushing them
>> out as any other extensions.
>>
>
> Hmmm.
>
> I like the contrib directory as a living example of "how to do an
> extension" directly available in the source tree. It also allows to test
> in-tree that the extension mechanism works. So I think it should be kept at
> least with a minimum set of dummy examples for this purpose, even if all
> current extensions are moved out.
>

It is mostly an example of "How to do an contrib module" rather than "how
to do an extension". There are differences between those things regarding
the the USE_PGXS and some other things. If we want to keep it as an
example of what we want people to do in the future, it needs be a really
good example. And if we want to step new things from going into contrib,
we wouldn't want to provide an example of how to put new things into it.

>
> Also, removing a feature is a regression, and someone is always bound to
> complain... What is the real benefit? ISTM that it is a solution that fixes
> no important problem. Reaching a consensus about what to move here or there
> will consume valuable time that could be spent on more important tasks...
> Is it worth it?
>

Yeah, I don't really see the benefit either. Some could be moved to core,
and some could just be removed, but many of them it just seems like we
would end up inventing a new 'contrib' to which is the same as the old, but
with a different name.

Cheers,

Jeff