Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion

Josh Berkus wrote:

>People,
>
>  
>
>>>So, why tie it into the PostgreSQL source tree?  Won't it be popular
>>>enough to live on its own, that it has to be distributed as part of the
>>>core?
>>>      
>>>
>
>Personally, I find it rather inconsistent to have any PL, other than PL/pgSQL, 
>as part of the core distribution -- when we are pushing the interfaces, such 
>as JDBC and libpqxx to seperate modules in pgFoundry.   Either we're trying 
>to lighten up the core, or we're not.    But right now there seems to be no 
>logic in operation.
>
>I do think, though, that we need some system to build RPMs for all the 
>pgFoundry stuff ...
>
>  
>

Server-side PLs might have quite different requirements from Client 
Interfaces. I don't think you can simply extrapolate in this way.

Personally, I hate the idea of having to write stuff like this example 
Joe Conway gave the other day from PL/R:

#if (CATALOG_VERSION_NO <= 200211021)
#define PG_VERSION_73_COMPAT
#elif (CATALOG_VERSION_NO <= 200310211)
#define PG_VERSION_74_COMPAT
#else
#define PG_VERSION_75_COMPAT
#endif

and all the consequent mess.

Yuck.

Frankly, although I am a relative newcomer around here, I am not 
convinced that "lightening the core" has been a great success, or can be 
made to be so. Certainly Peter's comments on the history to date suggest 
that a re-evaluation might be in order.

cheers

andrew