Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Right. When was the last time any user looked under src/pl in the first
>> place? Or even under src? If you're looking for pljava, it's the
>> first hit in Google.
> The difference is that I will have reasonable confidence that
> the README.TXT under "src/pl" will give instructions that match
> the version of PostgreSQL that I have. I assume that README
> will call out the version of PL/R or PL/Ruby that I want that
> was tested with the release of PostgreSQL I have.
On what do you base that assumption? A README file laying about in an
otherwise unused part of the source tree is the very definition of "out
of sight, out of mind". I can pretty much guarantee you that it will
NOT get updated, especially not during minor releases. Even if it is up
to date at the instant we put out a release, it'll be obsolete as soon
as the external project makes an update release. ISTM links like this
are far better kept on project websites ...
> I would imagine with this README.TXT proposal, it's the responsibility
> of the PL/XXX developer to port their PL to PostgreSQL during the Beta,
> and if the did and tested it, the release will point to the version
> of the PL supported by the PL maintainer for that version.
And if they didn't? I was just noticing that the current release of
plruby contains installation instructions that appear to date to 7.3.
If he can't be bothered to update his own docs, what are the odds that
he'll submit timely updates for a README in the main source tree?
regards, tom lane
