| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely |
| Date: | 2015-05-29 01:50:35 |
| Message-ID: | 5567C5EB.3070703@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 5/28/15 3:35 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> What we would need for this is an 'extensions' directory, or similar,
> and a clear definition of what the requirements are around getting into
> it are. With that, we could decide for each module currently in contrib
> if it should go into the 'extensions' directory. I'm not sure that we
> would necessairly have to remove the contrib module or any modules which
> are deemed to not be appropriate for the 'extensions' directory.
This seems reasonable to me. It's in line with the recent move from
contrib to bin. It'll just be quite a bit bigger of an undertaking.
(50 threads to discuss the merits of each module separately?) Maybe
start by picking the top 5 and sort those out.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2015-05-29 02:09:47 | Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2015-05-29 01:39:00 | auto_explain sample rate |