Re: deprecating contrib for PGXN

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 05/17/2011 01:31 PM, Darren Duncan wrote:
>>> I have missed it if this was discussed before but ...
>>>
>>> Would now be a good time to start deprecating the contrib/ directory as
>>> a way to distribute Pg add-ons, with favor given to PGXN and the like
>>> instead?
>> If PGXN moves into .Org infrastructure (which I believe is currently the
>> plan) then yes, contrib should go away.
>
> What is the benefit of getting rid of it?

Maybe something could be clarified for me first.

Are the individual projects in contrib/ also distributed separately from Pg, on
their own release schedules, so users can choose to upgrade them independently
of upgrading Pg itself, or so their developers can have a lot of flexibility to
make major changes without having to follow the same stability or deprecation
timetables of Pg itself?

If the only way to get a contrib/ project is bundled with Pg, then the project
developers and users don't get the flexibility that they otherwise would have.

That's the main answer, I think.

-- Darren Duncan