On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 15:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> From a maintenance point of view there seems little need
> for either project to get integrated: they don't appear to have much
> of any code that is tightly tied to backend innards.
This is a slightly circular argument. They have had to be written with
no linkage to core to allow them to be created outside of it.
I agree with your general principles on inclusion of features and also
agree that in this specific case the patches should be rejected. Growing
up outside of core cannot be a reason to exclude new capabilities from
core, but it is probably a reason to reject specific code.
In both these cases, I can see that the capability could be provided in
a different way and benefit from tighter integration.
I think we should return them with comments that if you integrate them
more with core *and* can justify having done so, then we might include
those features later.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
