On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 07:38:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> We have three possible choices for this: do nothing, install a
> bug-compatible, allegedly-clean-room implementation in contrib:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-09/msg00077.php
> or put a hopefully-cleaner design into core, eg per my suggestions here:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg00467.php
> I favor the third alternative, mainly because by changing the API
> we remove all doubt as to whether any "intellectual property"
> remains from the original GPL'd code. However, we've got to make up
> our minds and get on with it.
FWIW, I'm +1 on the cleaner design you suggested. While I understand the
concerns of adding features/API this late; as a user, I'd rather not wait
another year to have these available in core(yes, I know alternative measures
would exist if it did not make it into core, but the convenience of having it
there would certainly be nice). That is, I really like the waiting variant.
It is something that I would use. The lack thereof(IIRC) in the current contrib
implementation is something that I have recently lamented about.
I understand that "want" is not a reason to compromise the feature freeze, so I
hope the legal concerns Tom mentions will be enough. =)