Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>
To: Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Date: 2008-07-23 19:01:57
Message-ID: 7E6D1CA2-C4E7-48ED-B689-332CB3E3EA28@hi-media.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

As a potential user of the solution, I'd very much like to have
plproxy into -core if possible and sensible. Knowing nothing about the
"sensible" part, I'd vote for inclusion.

But whether -core vote for or against inclusion, I'd appreciate to
have a module or package notion into PostgreSQL and a tool to easily
install existing extensions, which would build on PGXS extension
system to build on the fly code version compatible with current major
PG version :
pg_pkg add-mirror http://packages.postgresql.org/
pg-pkg list [remote | available]
pg_pkg add plproxy prefix citext
pg_pkg install plproxy mydatabase
pg_pkg uninstall [--force] plproxy mydatabase
..

Of course details about PostgreSQL module/package management belongs
to some other thread, I'll try to browse our archives to see where we
are on this point and to propose a summary and some ideas if
necessary. Any reader willing to share good starting points? :)

I think having something to easily manage PostgreSQL modules/packages
(including contribs ones) would change the matter here. If it was easy
to fetch a list of -core reviewed or supported extensions and to
install them on ones databases, having plproxy not included in -core
would be an *easy* decision to make.

Le 23 juil. 08 à 19:54, Marko Kreen a écrit :
> appear before 2011... Not that its a argument for merge, but maybe
> pushing it to an "all-presentable-extensions" package and having
> proper
> review done would be a good idea.

Now, it seems to me we already have a place where to distribute
reviewed code, maintained by non-core hackers and integrated into
distributions and documentation of PostgreSQL: contrib.

Maybe contrib (plans to get a better name ongoing? extra, extension,
anything less remote then current naming) would fit the bill here as a
good compromise?

Sorry to raise unwanted subjects, please do not feed the trolls (in
this thread at least) :)
- --
Dimitri Fontaine

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkiHgCUACgkQlBXRlnbh1blP8ACgmKWAN4PyOSUQdl9hM+vZV0xK
PJYAn1OmTreVxrqjDxsTcjGiNFO/30ok
=SYGB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2008-07-23 19:11:06 Re: [PATCHES] odd output in restore mode
Previous Message Zdenek Kotala 2008-07-23 19:01:45 Re: pltcl_*mod commands are broken on Solaris 10