On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 11:24:19PM -0500, Regina Obe wrote:
> Here is first version of my patch using the @extschema:extensionname@ syntax
> you proposed.
>
> This patch includes:
> 1) Changes to replace references of @extschema:extensionname@ with the
> schema of the required extension
> 2) Documentation for the feature
> 3) Tests for the feature.
>
> There is one issue I thought about that is not addressed by this.
>
> If an extension is required by another extension and that required extension
> schema is referenced in the extension scripts using the
> @extschema:extensionname@ syntax, then ideally we should prevent the
> required extension from being relocatable. This would prevent a user from
> accidentally moving the required extension, thus breaking the dependent
> extensions.
>
> I didn't add that feature cause I wasn't sure if it was overstepping the
> bounds of what should be done, or if we leave it up to the user to just know
> better.
An alternative would be to forbid using @extschema:extensionname@ to
reference relocatable extensions. DBA can toggle relocatability of an
extension to allow it to be referenced.
--strk;
