Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: plpython3

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, James Pye <lists(at)jwp(dot)name>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plpython3
Date: 2010-01-13 18:16:21
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> My argument would be now, what is the benefit of the James Pye version
> over our version. James can you illustrate succinctly why we should be
> supporting a new version?
> If there is, I am still all for it, but I am a python bigot.

Yeah, it's just my viewpoint that we don't want 2 python procedural
languages in core.  One should be in core, and one should go on
pgFoundry/PGAN.  Which ever one is "better" by some clear definition
should go in core.

As I said, I have no opinion about whether Pye's PLpython should replace
the existing because I'm in no position to judge.

--Josh Berkus

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-01-13 18:21:21
Subject: Re: pg_dump sort order for functions
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-01-13 18:15:28
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove redundant ownership checks

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group