Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18791.1084989631@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> That is the plan ... unless someone knows a reason why they can't be >> built independently of the core? > How about this one: Everything we have moved from the core to gborg so > far has been a miserable failure. JDBC seems to be doing fine ... but I think that exception just proves your point. If there's not a viable community around a particular piece of code, pushing it out to gborg/pgFoundry won't magically create one. I strongly disagree with moving out the existing PLs; it's just a whole lot easier to maintain them alongside the backend. (This is especially true of plpgsql of course, but it is very common that global edits hit the other PLs as well.) I think Joe Conway's experience with maintaining plR separately shows the overhead involved. I would like to see plperlNG eventually supplant the existing plperl in core CVS. If it weren't for the circular-build-dependency issue, I'd probably be in favor of pulling in plPHP too. I do see a point to having pgFoundry though, which is that it allows more people to be granted direct commit access to the bits of code they are working on. For the core project, I think we should continue the present policy of keeping commit access pretty closely held, so pulling all that stuff back in would make the committers a real bottleneck. With separate projects we can let each project determine its own commit access policies. I agree with the opinion that we need to figure out how to produce more-or-less-integrated release filesets from multiple projects. There's too much stuff being pushed out for development or release engineering reasons that users want to see as part of the standard product. We've let the lure of "separate projects can have separate release schedules" blind us to the fact that for most projects there's not really any benefit there. Client-side libraries like JDBC can get some benefit, but server-side stuff I don't think so. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: