| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Psql_General (E-mail)" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core? |
| Date: | 2005-04-02 05:04:48 |
| Message-ID: | 1161.1112418288@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vishal Kashyap @ [SaiHertz] | 2005-04-02 05:13:43 | Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core? |
| Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2005-04-02 04:43:25 | Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vishal Kashyap @ [SaiHertz] | 2005-04-02 05:13:43 | Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-04-02 04:46:41 | Re: LEFT JOIN used in psql describe.c |