Re: Extensions, patch v16

Hi there,

it's clear we need versions, probably, major.minor would be enough. The problem
I see is how to keep .so in sync with .sql ? Should we store .sql in database ?

Also, we need permissions for extension, since we have open/closed
extensions.

Oleg

On Sat, 11 Dec 2010, David E. Wheeler wrote:

> On Dec 11, 2010, at 1:09 PM, David Fetter wrote:
>
>>> Why is it in the makefile at all? If the makefile does need to know it,
>>> why don't we have it scrape the number out of the control file? Or even
>>> more to the point, since when do we need version numbers in extensions?
>>
>> We *absolutely* need version numbers in extensions. People will want
>> to have a certain version, or a certain minimum version, etc., etc.,
>> etc., just as they do for any other software.
>>
>> Seriously, are you OK?
>
> One of the biggest mistakes in the creation of CPAN was allowing modules without extensions. It makes figuring out what to upgrade extremely difficult. Learning from that, PGXN requires version numbers for all extensions.
>
> Best,
>
> David
>
>
>

Regards,
Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru)
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83