From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Dimitri Fontaine" <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, "pgsql-hackers Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Quick Extensions Question |
Date: | 2011-03-03 18:52:15 |
Message-ID: | F4FCD96B-8044-4DAB-A0F5-2361EF0DB815@kineticode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mar 3, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> Which is why my suggestion is pretty much free from any design
>
> Now you're scaring me. I read that as "the proposed design is free
> from the influence of any design effort."
No. Just as simple as possible.
> That's precisely how you
> can find yourself standing in a corner with wet paint on the floor
> all around you.
But if the paint were made with chocolate, would you care?
> At a minimum you would need to specify the format of the dependency
> list and either some header and or terminator or some specification
> of something which *can't* be in the list. It would be ironic if
> our extensions configuration wasn't extensible.
I'm talking about a hard-coded list of things that can go on the list, core items, simply separated by commas (or however the postgresql.conf format supports a list of items). No external dependencies (like the particular version of libxml2) or any version numbers at all, aside from the server itself.
Best,
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-03-03 18:54:05 | Re: Quick Extensions Question |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-03-03 18:49:25 | Re: Quick Extensions Question |