Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Matthew T. O'Connor
Тема Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions
Дата
Msg-id 4086C32E.70106@zeut.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> Hello,
>
> My personal opinion is that contrib should be removed entirely. Just 
> have a contrib.txt that says all contrib modules are at pgfoundry or 
> whatever.


I'm not so sure that's a good idea.  I think contrib is a good 
repository for code that is tightly tied to the backend, or provides 
extentions to the backen, or is something that will eventually be 
integrated into the backend, but just isn't ready for prime time yet 
(pg_autovacuum for example).  The value of contrib is exposure.  I 
firmly believe that pg_autovacuum would not have gotten as much testing 
from gborg as it has from contrib.

Perhaps the definition of what should be in contrib should be tightened 
down, and anything that doesn't meet that definition should be removed, 
but I think contrib is a good concept.

Matthew



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Neil Conway
Дата:
Сообщение: valgrind errors
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions