Re: modules

Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> This changes the game slightly from trying to get systems to come with
> PostreSQL "modules" installed into PostgreSQL by default, to where
> systems come with PostgreSQL "module" *packages* (rpms, debs, pkg, etc)
> installed by default, and the DB owners can do the "PostgreSQL install"
> part themselves.
>
> Would this slight change of the game be of any value?
>
>
>   

No. "packages" has another meaning in the database context.

I am going to point out AGAIN that we have already had a debate about 
this subject, not that long ago, including the name by which we should 
call these things. The consensus name then was "modules" and I think 
that was right.

Those who do take cognizance of previous debates are doomed to repeat them.

cheers

andrew