[Review] Re: [PATCH] Remove useless USE_PGXS support in contrib - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Cédric Villemain
Subject [Review] Re: [PATCH] Remove useless USE_PGXS support in contrib
Date
Msg-id 201306191233.30450.cedric@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [PATCH] Remove useless USE_PGXS support in contrib  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Le jeudi 13 juin 2013 05:16:48, Peter Eisentraut a écrit :
> This has served no purpose except to
>
> 1. take up space
> 2. confuse users
> 3. produce broken external extension modules that take contrib as an
> example 4. break builds of PostgreSQL when users try to fix 3. by
> exporting USE_PGXS
>
> There is adequate material in the documentation and elsewhere (PGXN) on
> how to write extensions and their makefiles, so this is not needed.
> ---
> pursuant to discussion here:
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/512CEAB8.9010400@gmx.net

* Submission review: patch apply on HEAD, no doc or test required.

* Usability review
** Does the patch actually implement that? yes
** Do we want that?

Consensus is not complete: some use case raised.

1/ regression test: not a good excuse, see [1]

2/ being able to build contrib out of tree, it is unsure it is really needed
on its own but was suggested. See [2] and [3]

Arguments against removal are new features (extension layout, more work on
PGXS shoulders, extension headers exported, clean regression test for PGXS)

** Does it follow the community-agreed behavior?

Some people voiced against the idea. More answers might be better to confirm
that this is wanted. Amul, Joe, Craig ?

** Are there dangers?

The only I can see is packagers building contribs with PGXS, but as it is
currently buggy I'm sure they can't do that.

* Feature test: it deprecates a not-fully-implemented-feature (even fully
implemented this may not be considered a feature at all)

* Performance review: not relevant (contribs may build some µs faster...)

* Coding review: OK

* Architecture review: looks good too.

The patch needs to reach consensus before commit. There is no status for that
in CF, for me current status is: 'Ready, Waiting more feedback from
community'.

[1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-
id/1371610695.13762.25.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
[2] http://www.postgresql.org/message-
id/1371172850.79798.YahooMailNeo@web193505.mail.sg3.yahoo.com
[3] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/51BBE3A5.40607@2ndquadrant.com

--
Cédric Villemain +33 (0)6 20 30 22 52
http://2ndQuadrant.fr/
PostgreSQL: Support 24x7 - Développement, Expertise et Formation

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Implementing incremental backup
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimizing pglz compressor