Bruce Momjian said:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 May 2004, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > >
>> > > plPHP and plPerlNG both belong on pgfoundry, not in the core
>> > > distribution ...
>> >
>> > Uhhh?? Are you ripping out all core pls then? plPerlNG is supposed
>> > to replace plPerl, I was talking with Bruce and he seemed to think
>> > that (as long as the code was good enough) that we could incorporate
>> > plPHP???
>>
>> That is the plan ... unless someone knows a reason why they can't be
>> built independently of the core? ecpg relies on the grammar files in
>> core, but as far as I knew (please correct me if I'm wrong) the pls
>> only rely on headers and libraries that get installed ...
>
> Server-side languages are tied into the backend even closer than the
> user data types. They are best in the core distribution. We didn't
> put plR in core because it had a conflicting license.
>
I would never have created the plperlNG project on pgfoundry if I had
thought it meant divorcing plperl from the core.
pgfoundry in my mind can be a home for projects that will eventually fold
into the core, as well as things that will always remain separate.
I agree with Bruce about the place of server-side PLs.
cheers
andrew
