On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 01:52:41PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Peter, can we add PL/sh into CVS for 7.3?
>
> I'm kind of against adding PL/sh to CVS, ever; and I believe Peter is
> too, else he'd have done it already.
>
> I know you will say that PL/sh is not any more dangerous than the
> untrusted versions of plperl and pltcl, but there is a difference.
> PL/sh has *no reason to exist* other than to implement
> non-transaction-safe outside-the-database behavior; there is no safe
> behavior for which it is the preferred tool. I think making it easily
> available is a bad idea, because people *will* shoot themselves in the
> foot with it.
:-) In my Debian is available a lot of non-safe programs and utils...I think people have own brain and if documentation
warnabout PL/shit's enough. (BTW, default Apache distribution contains shell basedCGI script and people can write
othersown shell scripts -- it'sinteresting, but people more use PHP/Perl/Python/etc. Why? Because they good know what
isbetter/safe.) Karel
-- Karel Zak <zakkr@zf.jcu.cz>http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/C, PostgreSQL, PHP, WWW, http://docs.linux.cz,
http://mape.jcu.cz
