On E, 2005-08-15 at 10:30 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> I have negotiated with the author of pl/Ruby to release plRuby under the
> PostgreSQL license.
> The reason I did this is the following:
> 1. I felt we needed a truly OO language in core.
> 2. plPython isn't really moving forward and has the whole
> trusted/untrusted issue.
Is there a sound reason to believe that pl/Ruby does not have the
trusted/untrusted issue ?
I mean it took some time for pl/python to reveal that it can't be run as
a trusted language.
> Now anyone who knows me, knows that I love Python which means this is
> not a language argument as much as a functionality argument.
> Ruby for good or bad is gaining a large following and has become a very
> active language in a short period of time. It can also be trusted and
Both of these things could be said about Python when it was about the
same age Ruby is now.
> I believe that unless plPython can either be fixed
Fixed how ?
> or is going to continue to move forward as a pl language
Why is "movin forward" needed ?
> that we should consider deprecating it and even removing it in 8.2 or 8.3.
This argument reminds me of the "let's rewrite postgresql in C++"
proposal that comes up every few months.
> As far as a PL language plruby seems to have some really good stuff.
> Here is the docs:
> What does everybody think?
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Thomas Hallgren||Date: 2005-08-16 05:40:00|
|Subject: Re: pl/Ruby, deprecating plPython and Core|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2005-08-16 04:24:34|
|Subject: Re: Testing of MVCC |