From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: [PATCH 02/14] Add support for a generic wal reading facility dubbed XLogReader |
Date: | 2012-12-11 22:51:25 |
Message-ID: | m27goodwya.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> User trust, maybe, but the "maintenance" argument seems bogus.
> We ship contrib on the same release schedule as core.
I meant maintenance as in updating the code when it needs to be, I'm not
sure contrib systematically receives the same careness as core. I have
no data to back my feeling, though.
> TBH, I don't believe that ordinary users will need this tool at all,
> ever, and thus I don't want it in src/bin/. From a packaging standpoint
> it will be a lot easier if it's in contrib ... otherwise I'll probably
> have to invent some new sub-RPM along the lines of postgresql-extras
> so as to avoid bloating the core server package.
Oh. I didn't know that the server package would be considered bloated by
anyone and that would impact the way to ship our binaries.
What about splitting contrib *officially* then, not just in your RH
packages, and have postgresql-server-extra-diagnosis, -extra-data-types
and -contrib with the things you tipically don't want in production?
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2012-12-11 22:52:09 | Re: Re: [PATCH 02/14] Add support for a generic wal reading facility dubbed XLogReader |
Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2012-12-11 22:43:10 | Re: pg_dump cosmetic problem while dumping/restoring rules |