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

From Marc G. Fournier
Subject Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions
Date
Msg-id 20040421200023.X32445@ganymede.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Tom Lane wrote:

> No, those guys are exactly the sort of backend-dependent code I'm
> thinking of.  Teodor just recently made a GIST API change that affected
> both the core backend and tsearch (as well as the other GIST modules in
> contrib).  With separate distribution trees that would've been a lot
> more painful to do.
>
> I think the long-term plan for tsearch2, at least, should be full
> integration rather than separation ...

But there should be some sort of path to full integration ...
isdb_ibbn(sp?) has been there forever, and I canj't see it ever being
integrated ...

Personally, the neat thing about PostgreSQL is that we are extendible(sp?)
quite easily, and stuff like tsearch, earthdistance, postgis, etc all show
that very nicely ... why add for the sake of adding?

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions
Next
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: contrib vs. gborg/pgfoundry for replication solutions