| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: -Wformat-zero-length |
| Date: | 2012-08-03 20:01:18 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYeVDN48vBBRL1s2N5tyDHOO9mkhKpZkXAymD7A9eAXMQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> I don't disagree with pg_upgrade being operationally complex, but I
>> don't see how this relates to contrib vs. non-contrib at all. Are we
>> supposed to only have "simple" programs in src/bin? That seems a
>> strange policy.
>
> Well, perhaps we need to re-open the discussion then.
I feel like putting it in src/bin would carry an implication of
robustness that I'm not sanguine about. Granted, putting it in
contrib has already pushed the envelope in that direction further than
is perhaps warranted. But ISTM that if we ever want to put this in
src/bin someone needs to devote some serious engineering time to
filing down the rough edges.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-08-03 20:02:28 | Re: -Wformat-zero-length |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-08-03 19:22:58 | Re: -Wformat-zero-length |