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

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext intoPG core distribution?
Date
Msg-id 488A0C7F.3060507@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext intoPG core distribution?  ("Hiroshi Saito" <z-saito@guitar.ocn.ne.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers

Hiroshi Saito wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I tackled with hope temporarily. It seems that some adjustment is
> still required.
> http://winpg.jp/~saito/pg_work/plproxy/
> However, windows user desires to use. Of course, it is also me.


What is stopping you? Whether or not it works on Windows has (or should
have) nothing to do with whether or not it is in core.

Regarding your patch, the change w.r.t. the CONST token looks a bit odd
- can you explain what you're doing and why?


cheers

andrew

>


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [RFC] Unsigned integer support.
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?