Re: Ding-dong, contrib is dead ...
От | Merlin Moncure |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Ding-dong, contrib is dead ... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | b42b73150609051252s676821b1ub0fcf6c9f6229d2c@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Ding-dong, contrib is dead ... (Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/5/06, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes: > >> I also agree with Andrew that pgfoundry is not a appropriate place for > >> userlocks. They should be properly documented with a cleaned up api. > >> I have no objection from them being removed from contrib in the short > >> term due to the gpl issue, although I am not sure how you can > >> copyright a function wrapper. > > > > Right, I see the pgfoundry project as just a backwards-compatibility > > thing for anyone who doesn't want to change their code. I'm happy to > > put some cleaned-up functions into core right now (ie, for 8.2) if > > someone will do the legwork to define and implement them. > > hmm - that is all a nice and such - but is it really a good idea to do > this that late in the release-cycle ? > I think the most "natural" thing would be to replace the existing GPL'd > userlock code with the new one and discuss the API-change one for 8.3 > and up ... I think that's a reasonable solution, replace the existing (renamed?) contrib with new wrappers and push core migration/documentation out to 8.3. Then we are talking about one line wrappers here, not a feature per se... merlin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: