Re: deprecating contrib for PGXN

"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> I think building tools so that PGXN distributions are automatically
> harvested and turned into StackBuilder/RPM/.deb binaries would be the place
> to start on that.

Well, I'm not sure I buy into that idea, I need to think about it some
more. The thing with debian for example is that the package building
needs to be all automatic, and determistic — you're not granted to have
the next version build a different set of binary packages.

We're working about that very point with postgresql-X.Y-extension
packages so that you can have a new binary package produced when you add
support for a new major version, but we're not there yet. Having the
set of binary packages change manually is ok, but debian also have the
concept of binNMU which is an infrastructure forced rebuild if you wish
(picture libc upgrades).

So, given how the debian packaging actually works, having something
automated that works from “distributions” which in PGXN can contain
several extensions — I'm not seeing it. It looks a little like how
things work in the Java world with jar and war packaging…

FYI, I'm still working on apt.postgresql.org so that we have debian
packaging for all major versions here, and all extensions for all those
major versions too. It's not the first item on my TODO list, but we
will get there eventually — this year I would figure, we even have a
team forming.

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support