Re: modules

On Thursday 03 April 2008 08:47:12 Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 21:03:05 +0530
>
> "Tom Dunstan" <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 8:25 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > If this were at all true we would not not have seen the complaints
> > > from people along the lines of "My ISP won't install contrib". But
> > > we have, and quite a number of times. We have concrete evidence
> > > that calling it contrib actually works against us.
> >
> > It's hard to see ISPs who won't install contrib from installing
> > ${random module} from the big bad internet as has been discussed in
> > this thread, but who knows?
>
> Sure it is. The very word contrib brings about ideas of things like:
>
> Unstable, Cooker, unofficial.
>
> "modules" is completely different (from a perception perspective).
>
> IMO the core modules should be compiled via configure with something
> like:
>
> ./configure --enable-module=ALL
>
> or
>
> ./configure --enable-module=pgcrypto --enable-module=cube
>
> This would install all the modules but not enable them in the database
> itself (of course). This could also be extended to the pls so that we
> have exactly one mechanism to control those options as well.
>
> ./configure --enable-module=pgcrypto --enable-module=plperl

I think --enable-module might be the wrong term here, since you specificaly
state we are not "enabling" them in the database.

I think --with-module=... might be a better way to go.

>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
>
>
> --
> The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
> PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
> United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/
> Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

--
Darcy Buskermolen
Command Prompt, Inc.
+1.503.667.4564 X 102
http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997