Re: Should contrib modules install .h files? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
Date
Msg-id 20180802165622.hqkolhrz7bkdndbs@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?  (Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>)
Responses Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
List pgsql-hackers
On 2018-08-02 17:53:17 +0100, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> >>>>> "Andres" == Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> 
>  >> Also, "near future" means "before Monday". I don't want to ship
>  >> beta3 with this in place if we end up reverting later, because it'd
>  >> mean thrashing packagers' file manifests, which they won't
>  >> appreciate. It might be best to revert in v11 for now, and then we
>  >> can put it back after beta3 if there's agreement that the questions
>  >> are satisfactorily resolved.
> 
>  Andres> +1
> 
> On the other hand, _I'm_ getting pressure from at least one packager to
> nail down a final release of pllua-ng so they can build it along with
> beta3 (in place of the old broken pllua), which obviously I can't do if
> I keep having to fiddle with workarounds for hstore.h.

I just don't have a lot of sympathy for that, given the
months-after-freeze-window timing. It's not like *any* of this just
started to be problematic in v11.

Greetings,

Andres Freund


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Gierth
Date:
Subject: Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
Next
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: doc - add missing documentation for "acldefault"