OK, well, what PostGIS needs is the ability for 'ALTER EXTENSION …. UPDATE foo’ to end up with two extensions in the
end,‘foo’ and ‘foo_new’. That’s what’s happening in the 2.x -> 3 upgrade process, as ‘postgis’ becomes ‘postgis’ and
‘postgis_raster’.
Presumably 15 years out from the 1.x -> 2.x we can stop worrying about bundling unpackaged postgis into an extension,
andjust recommend a hard upgrade dump/restore to the hardy souls still running 1.x.
P.
> On Feb 26, 2020, at 7:37 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> * Sandro Santilli (strk@kbt.io) wrote:
>> On pgsql-hackers we only want to find a future-proof way to "package
>> existing objects into an extension". If the syntax
>> `CREATE EXTENSION <extname> FROM UNPACKAGED`
>> has gone, would it be ok for just:
>> `CREATE EXTENSION <extname>`
>> to intercept unpackaged objects and package them ?
>
> No. The reason it was removed is because it's not going to be safe to
> do when we have trusted extensions. Perhaps it would be possible to
> figure out a way to make it safe, but the reason FROM UNPACKAGED was
> created and existed doesn't apply any more. That PostGIS has been using
> it for something else entirely is unfortunate, but the way to address
> what PostGIS needs is to talk about that, not talk about how this ugly
> hack used to work and doesn't any more.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel