Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Date
Msg-id 48864BC1.1040906@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom, Simon, etc.:

Of the several things which "PostgreSQL could learn from MySQL" which we 
covered at pgCon was that the requirement to hunt hither and yon for 
popular add-ins is one of the primary reasons for developers not using 
PostgreSQL.

Further, one of the main reasons why people do use PostgreSQL is our 
advanced functionality.  If we focus only on core SQL features, there 
are few reasons to use us over MySQL, Oracle express, SQL Server, or 
Firebird.

Minimalism isn't its own reward.  Obviously Tom has reason to worry 
about the overall maintenance effort for the PostgreSQL code.  But we 
need to balance that against the need to add features that users want 
and will keep our community growing.

If the way to do this is by packaging stuff together but maintaining 
separate CVS trees, then ok -- but then we need a plan for how we're 
going to do that, rather than just rejecting patches.

The general case aside, I really feel strongly that citext belongs in 
core unless we come up with some other means to do case-insensitive 
text. It's one of the top 10 newbie questions.

--Josh



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Plans for 8.4
Next
From: Markus Wanner
Date:
Subject: Re: Plans for 8.4