Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions
Date
Msg-id 14319.1082573830@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> My personal opinion is that contrib should be removed entirely.

That's not real workable for code that is tightly tied to the backend,
such as the various GIST index extensions presently in contrib.  It's
just easier to maintain that code when it's in with the backend.

However the replication modules don't seem to have such a linkage,
so I have no objection to moving them out.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Matthew T. O'Connor"
Date:
Subject: Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions
Next
From: "Dave Page"
Date:
Subject: Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions