Re: Removing pg_pltemplate and creating "trustable" extensions

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Removing pg_pltemplate and creating "trustable" extensions
Date: 2020-01-28 20:45:33
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaLcJn=OqPU1aD7qfdgOcHPYAiQX-BkaUWoWL5ujjkLqw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 3:29 PM Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> I get that you want to push forward with making this part of the DB
> owner, and I said up-thread that I'd be able to live with that, but I
> still don't understand what the argument is against making it part of
> CREATE instead.

It's a change from the status quo. If we're going to how it works, we
should try to agree on how it ought to work. Tom's proposal dodges
that by leaving things exactly as they are, deferring any actual
modifications to who can do what to a future patch.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2020-01-28 20:51:54 Re: BufFileRead() error signalling
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-01-28 20:42:08 Re: making the backend's json parser work in frontend code