|From:||"Regina Obe" <lr(at)pcorp(dot)us>|
|Cc:||"'Christoph Berg'" <cb(at)df7cb(dot)de>, <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "'Laurenz Albe'" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'Paul Ramsey'" <pramsey(at)cleverelephant(dot)ca>|
|Subject:||RE: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 11:46:50PM -0500, Regina Obe wrote:
> > > Re: Sandro Santilli
> > > > I'm attaching an updated version of the patch. This time the patch
> > > > is tested. Nothing changes unless the .control file for the
> > > > subject extension doesn't have a "wildcard_upgrades = true"
> > > >
> > > > When wildcard upgrades are enabled, a file with a "%" symbol as
> > > > the "source" part of the upgrade path will match any version and
> > >
> > > Fwiw I believe wildcard_upgrades isn't necessary in the .control file.
> > > If there are no % files, none would be used anyway, and if there
> > > are, it's
> > clear
> > > it's meant as wildcard since % won't appear in any remotely sane
> > > version number.
> > I also like the idea of skipping the wildcard_upgrades syntax.
> > Then there is no need to have a conditional control file for PG 16 vs.
> > older versions.
> Here we go. Attached a version of the patch with no "wildcard_upgrades"
> controlling it.
I think you should increment the version number on the file name of this
You had one earlier called 0001-...
The one before that was missing a version number entirely.
Maybe call this 0003-...
|Next Message||Justin Pryzby||2022-11-16 23:25:07||Re: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames|
|Previous Message||'Sandro Santilli'||2022-11-16 23:09:33||Re: [PATCH] Support % wildcard in extension upgrade filenames|