Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core?
Date
Msg-id 1161.1112418288@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: plPHP in core?  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core?  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core?  (Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>)
Re: [GENERAL] plPHP in core?  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Are we interested in having plPHP in core?

> Is there a reason why it can no longer operate as a standalone language
> out of pgfoundry, like pl/java and pl/perl?

PLs are sufficiently tightly tied to the core that it's probably
easier to maintain them as part of our core CVS than otherwise.
(Ask Joe Conway about PL/R.  Thomas Hallgren is probably not that
happy about maintaining pl/java out of core, either.  And pl/perl
*is* in core.)

I'm thinking that a pl/PHP is much more interesting for the long term
than, say, pl/tcl (mind you, I am a Tcl partisan from way back, but
I see that many people are not so enlightened).  Barring any licensing
problems I think this is something to pursue.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: LEFT JOIN used in psql describe.c
Next
From: "Vishal Kashyap @ [SaiHertz]"
Date:
Subject: Re: plPHP in core?