On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Bruce Momjian<bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On Monday 03 August 2009 21:07:00 David Fetter wrote:
>> > We require that people supply docs with their changes, and it is
>> > totally unreasonable to let them send in catalog changes which do not
>> > include need migration changes. That's how it works in every other
>> > RDBMS outfit that has changes on disk, and we do not need to be the
>> > exception.
>>
>> Well, blocker number one for that is that pg_migrator is not even in the
>> PostgreSQL CVS repository, but is more like an endorsed third-party product.
>
> I wouldn't say pg_migrator is "endorsed". It is on pgfoundry and was
> mentioned in the press release, but it isn't mentioned in our
> documentation about upgrading, it wasn't mentioned in the release notes,
> and it isn't mentioned on our web site, except as a news item.
>
> I believe this is because of concerns about pg_migrator's "experimental"
> nature.
I think so. And also because it has a fair number of documented
restrictions. Hopefully we'll be able to remove some of those in a
future release.
...Robert
