Re: Extensions User Design - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: Extensions User Design
Date
Msg-id 4A42A40D.5040502@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Extensions User Design  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
Responses Re: Extensions User Design  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
Re: Extensions User Design  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers

David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jun 24, 2009, at 2:41 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> I agree they have too many. I think moving to none would be a 
>> mistake, though. Would they even drop things like Dynaloader or 
>> ExtUtils::MakeMaker? That would be crazy, IMNSHO. I think there's a 
>> sweet spot here and we are not very far away from it in the number of 
>> things we currently ship.
>
> They want to drop everything except for tools to download, build, 
> test, and install other modules. That's the limitation.
>
>

Well, I think in our case that would be going too far. I think there is 
a very good case for keeping a few key extensions in core both as 
exemplars and to make it easy to validate the extension mechanism 
itself. There have been suggestions in the past about throwing a bunch 
of things overboard, sometimes out of a passion for neatness more than 
anything else ISTM, but there have been good arguments against as well, 
particularly in the case of the PLs, which are tied so closely to the 
backend.

cheers

andrew


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: Extensions User Design
Next
From: Jaime Casanova
Date:
Subject: Re: Extensions User Design