Re: why two dashes in extension load files - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: why two dashes in extension load files
Date
Msg-id 26477.1297703687@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: why two dashes in extension load files  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
Responses Re: why two dashes in extension load files  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
Re: why two dashes in extension load files  (Cédric Villemain <cedric.villemain.debian@gmail.com>)
Re: why two dashes in extension load files  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
"David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com> writes:
> On Feb 14, 2011, at 8:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'm not convinced.  There was nothing in that discussion why any
>>> particular character would have to be allowed in a version number.

>> Well, there's already a counterexample in the current contrib stuff:
>> uuid-ossp.  We could rename that to uuid_ossp of course, but it's
>> not clear to me that there's consensus for forbidding dashes here.

> I'd be fine if commas were used instead.

Commas do not seem like an improvement to me at all --- they are widely
used as list separators.

I guess the real question is what's Peter's concrete objection to the
double-dash method?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_ctl failover Re: Latches, signals, and waiting
Next
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: why two dashes in extension load files