Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@fourpalms.org> writes:
> Until we have folks who are excited enough about it to plan it out and
> do the work, piecemeal rejection of components is not leading to a more
> solid product.
I'm lukewarm about whether to actually do the split or not ... but for
sure I agree with Thomas' point here. We need a plan and careful
implementation, or a split-up will just make life worse.
Stuff that is in the tree tends to get maintained in passing. For
example, I've got some changes to contrib/dblink/ in my in-progress
version of Chris' DROP COLUMN patch, because a grep for references
to rel->rd_att turned it up. If dblink weren't in our CVS it'd have
been broken by DROP COLUMN, and who knows whether we'd catch that
during beta? I realize that Marc wasn't proposing splitting off any
server-side code, but I still want to tread carefully about breaking
up the codebase.
regards, tom lane
