On tor, 2011-06-09 at 00:14 -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> Following up on the idea we've been exploring for making some
> extensions 
> more prominent, attached is the first rev that I think may be worth 
> considering seriously.  Main improvement from the last is that I 
> reorganized the docs to break out what I decided to tentatively name 
> "Core Extensions" into their own chapter.  No longer mixed in with
> the 
> rest of the contrib modules, and I introduce them a bit
> differently.   

For the directory name, I'd prefer either src/extensions (since there is
more than one), or if you want to go for short somehow, src/ext.  (Hmm,
I guess the installation subdirectory is also called "extension".  But
it felt wrong on first reading anyway.)

There is some funny business in your new src/extension/Makefile.  You
apparently based this on a very old version of contrib/Makefile (if
still contains a CVS keyword header), it uses for loops in make targets
after we just got rid of them, and it references some modules that
aren't there at all.  That file needs a complete redo based on current
sources, I think.

Equally, your new extension-global.mk sets MODULEDIR, which is no longer
necessary, and has a CVS header.  What version did you branch this
off? :)

Perhaps a small addition to the installation instructions would also be
appropriate, to tell people that certain core extensions, as it were,
are installed by default.

In response to

• Core Extensions relocation at 2011-06-09 04:14:53 from Greg Smith

Responses

• Re: Core Extensions relocation at 2011-06-11 16:38:03 from Greg Smith

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Jaime Casanova	Date: 2011-06-11 08:02:25
	Subject: Re: procpid?
Previous:	From: Jim Nasby	Date: 2011-06-11 05:02:13
	Subject: Re: procpid?