Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

The current commitfest queue has two entries that propose to migrate
existing pgfoundry projects (or improved versions thereof) into our
core distribution.  The more I think about this the less happy I am
with it.  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.  From a features
point of view, yeah they're cool, but there are scads of cool things
out there.  From a project-management point of view, it's insanity
to set a presumption that pgfoundry is just a proving ground for code
that should eventually get into core once it's mature enough or popular
enough or whatever.  We *have to* encourage the development of a cloud
of subprojects around the core, or core will eventually collapse of
its own weight.  We have not got the manpower to deal with an
ever-inflating collection of allegedly "core" code.  If anything,
we ought to be working to push more stuff out of the core distro so
that we can focus on the functionality that has to be there.

So my feeling is that we should not accept either of these patches.

Now, there is some value in submitting the code for review --- certainly
citext is a whole lot better than it was a few weeks ago.  I think it
would be a good idea to be open to reviewing pgfoundry code with the
same standards we'd use if we were going to integrate it.  Perhaps
commitfest is not the right venue for that, though, if only because
of the possibility of confusion over what's supposed to happen.

Comments?
        regards, tom lane