Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Should contrib modules install .h files? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 21149.1532319353@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Should contrib modules install .h files? (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
Re: Should contrib modules install .h files? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes: > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 09:42:08PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: >> So, +1 from me for having a directory for each extension. > So, like Stephen, that's a +1 from me. Same here. One-file-per-extension is too strongly biased to tiny extensions (like most of our contrib examples). I don't have a real strong opinion on whether it's too late to push this into v11. I do not think it'd break anything other than packagers' lists of files to be installed ... but it does seem like a new feature, and we're past feature freeze. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: