On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 06:57:18PM +0200, Wolfgang Walther wrote:
> Jacob Champion:
> > On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 9:32 AM Wolfgang Walther <walther@technowledgy.de> wrote:
> > > And that should also not be a problem for distributions - they could offer a libpq and a libpq_oauth package,
whereonly one of them can be installed at the same time, I guess? *
> > My outsider understanding is that maintaining this sort of thing
> > becomes a major headache, because of combinatorics. You don't really
> > want to ship a libpq and libpq-with-gss and libpq-with-oauth and
> > libpq-with-oauth-and-gss and ...
>
> That would only be the case, if you were to consider those other
> dependencies as "dangerous" as cURL. But we already depend on them. So if
> it's really the case that cURL is that much worse, that we consider loading
> it as a module... then the combinatorics should not be a problem either.
>
> However, if the other deps are considered problematic as well, then the ship
> has already sailed, and there is not point for a special case here anymore.
Yes, I think this is what I am asking too. For me it was curl's
security reputation and whether that would taint the security reputation
of libpq. For Tom, I think it was the dependency additions.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
