Re: deprecating contrib for PGXN
От | Darren Duncan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: deprecating contrib for PGXN |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4DD33F0F.4040008@darrenduncan.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: deprecating contrib for PGXN (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: deprecating contrib for PGXN
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> On 05/17/2011 01:31 PM, Darren Duncan wrote: >>> I have missed it if this was discussed before but ... >>> >>> Would now be a good time to start deprecating the contrib/ directory as >>> a way to distribute Pg add-ons, with favor given to PGXN and the like >>> instead? >> If PGXN moves into .Org infrastructure (which I believe is currently the >> plan) then yes, contrib should go away. > > What is the benefit of getting rid of it? Maybe something could be clarified for me first. Are the individual projects in contrib/ also distributed separately from Pg, on their own release schedules, so users can choose to upgrade them independently of upgrading Pg itself, or so their developers can have a lot of flexibility to make major changes without having to follow the same stability or deprecation timetables of Pg itself? If the only way to get a contrib/ project is bundled with Pg, then the project developers and users don't get the flexibility that they otherwise would have. That's the main answer, I think. -- Darren Duncan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: