On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 11:45:43AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
> > > Our distribution is not a place to experiment with things.
> > > That's what separate pgfoundry projects are for. The fact we
> > > have some unusual things in /contrib is not a reason to add
> > > more.
> >
> > If it's on track to become part of PostgreSQL, as other innovative
> > features have in the past, it very much does belong there. Why
> > marginalize the very thing that PostgreSQL is really good
> > at--innovative new features--by putting it somewhere where few
> > people will ever even see it?
> >
> > If there were some very, very clear language every place a person
> > could download, check references, or install PostgreSQL that new
> > experimental features are at pgFoundry, that might be different.
> > As it is, you have to be truly dedicated even to discover that
> > pgFoundry exists.
> >
> > Let's get full disjunctions in contrib with a good README and have
> > people figure out what to do with them from there. If no one
> > demands full inclusion in a couple of versions, let's take it out.
>
> Where does it stop, then? Do we have everything in /contrib. I
> don't see how this scales. When we took the code from Berkely, it
> had everyone's doctoral thesis in there, and we had to remove alot
> of it because it was just too messy.
If it were just me laying out the boundary, I'd say that anything that
changes the grammar of SQL--for example, adding FULL
DISJUNCTION--can't really be a viable trial outside the main
distribution channels and deserves a couple of versions' stay in one
of those channels if it passes the scrutiny of -hackers. I'd love to
see a "main distribution channel" that's not contrib, but that's for
the future and full disjunctions are now. :)
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Skype: davidfetter
Remember to vote!
