Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> I think that having it in contrib for a release cycle or so would be
> >> exactly the right approach, actually. �Peter's position that it should
> >> be in /bin is fine *once the bugs are out*. �Just dropping it there
> >> doesn't make the bugs go away.
>
> > I think in the previous iteration of this discussion I had the
> > impression that you felt that it wasn't really to the point where it
> > even met our standards for /contrib (although, admittedly, it seems
> > those are pretty darn low, at least as far as the stuff that's already
> > in there goes). If I misunderstood or if that that's no longer your
> > feeling then maybe it makes sense.
>
> In the 8.3->8.4 cycle I did think it was pretty half-baked. We've
> stomped many of the worst limitations since then, so I think that for
> 8.4->9.0 it might be a credible solution. We won't really know unless
> we try.
True. I do see this as a much-requested feature (like built-in
replication).
> > But I don't think we should do it
> > at this point unless it's as simple as "check it in and ship it". If
> > doing this seems likely to make 9.0 take longer to get out the door,
> > then I think we should wait and do it in 9.1 instead.
>
> Agreed, we're not holding up 9.0 for it. I think the main bit of work
> that would be needed to put it into contrib would be to SGML-ize the
> docs. Don't know if Bruce has got the time to get that done.
Creating the SGML docs is trivial, especially compared to the 9.0
release notes SGML. ;-) It will take only an hour --- I am basically
going to merge the README and the INSTALL file, remove mentions about
migrating to < 9.0, and add SGML markup. I labored on README and the
INSTALL files for a long time and can't figure out how to improve them.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com