Re: Extension Packaging - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David E. Wheeler
Subject Re: Extension Packaging
Date
Msg-id 5F62869B-43A5-4A04-9984-8EDE9C55D7D4@kineticode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Extension Packaging  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Apr 24, 2011, at 3:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Yeah.  It seems like a bad idea if the distribution "name" doesn't
> include sufficient information to tell which version it contains.
> I had in mind a convention like "distribution version x.y.z always
> contains extension version x.y".  Seems like minor version versus
> major version would be the way to explain that.

Does that apply to PostgreSQL itself? I guess release 9.0.4 contains 9.0. But it's a convention.

David



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Unlogged tables, persistent kind
Next
From: Christopher Browne
Date:
Subject: Re: Unlogged tables, persistent kind