Very actively, http://plj.codehaus.org
Dave
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Dave Cramer wrote:
>
>> pl-j ( the other java procedural language ) is definately interested
>> in being in core.
>>
> Is it actively developed? Not being rude... I just haven't heard much
> (almost nothing) about it.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
>
>
>> Dave
>>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Are we interested in having plPHP in core?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is there a reason why it can no longer operate as a standalone
>>>> language out of pgfoundry, like pl/java and pl/perl?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> PLs are sufficiently tightly tied to the core that it's probably
>>> easier to maintain them as part of our core CVS than otherwise.
>>> (Ask Joe Conway about PL/R. Thomas Hallgren is probably not that
>>> happy about maintaining pl/java out of core, either. And pl/perl
>>> *is* in core.)
>>>
>>> I'm thinking that a pl/PHP is much more interesting for the long term
>>> than, say, pl/tcl (mind you, I am a Tcl partisan from way back, but
>>> I see that many people are not so enlightened). Barring any licensing
>>> problems I think this is something to pursue.
>>>
>>> regards, tom lane
>>>
>>> ---------------------------(end of
>>> broadcast)---------------------------
>>> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to
>>> majordomo@postgresql.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>
>