Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 2 May 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> >>>
> >>> The issue is that we have had to wack around the existing PL languages
> >>> for almost every release to make them work with server changes, and
> >>> being outside our CVS, plPHP isn't getting that whacking.
> >>
> >>
> >> And the point is, as Tom has pointed out with tsearch2, that even *in* CVS,
> >> it is a fair amount of work to 'whack' other ppls code ... it shouldn't be
> >> Tom's responsibility (which is generally what it comes down to) to keep
> >> someone else's code up to speed with changes in the server ...
> >
> > Well we try to keep up :)
>
> I'm not pointing fingers at you either :) But, you are one of how many
> that try and get 'added to core'? How many things do we have in contrib
> that the only person that does any 'whacking' is Tom? A couple I've seen
> patches go around for, but for a good portion of them, I imagine that they
> are 'dead except that Tom keeps fixing them' ...
>
> Tom's focus shouldn't be making sure that everyone's third party add on
> "still works" during a release cycle, that should be the responsibility of
> the maintainers of those projects, to follow changes and make sure they
> are implemented ...
>
> That is what pgFoundry was setup for ... to give projects the visibiilty
> they would get through the core distribution by making sure they are
> referenced in a central place, but providing the maintainers with direct
> CVS access to make changes to their code in a timely manner .. *shrug*
>
The bottom line is that it is more efficient for one person to adjust
all the PL's at once rather than each PL learning about the changes and
making them.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
