On 2020-Apr-11, Robert Haas wrote:
> I *would* like to find a way to address the proliferation of binaries,
> because I've got other things I'd like to do that would require
> creating still more of them, and until we come up with a scalable
> solution that makes everybody happy, there's going to be progressively
> more complaining every time. One possible solution is to adopt the
> 'git' approach and decide we're going to have one 'pg' command (or
> whatever we call it). I think the way that 'git' does it is that all
> of the real binaries are stored in a directory that users are not
> expected to have in their path, and the 'git' wrapper just looks for
> one based on the name of the subcommand.
I like this idea so much that I already proposed it in the past[1], so +1.
[1] https://postgr.es/m/20160826202911.GA320593@alvherre.pgsql
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
