On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 10:00:56AM -0700, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 9:49 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 09:43:01AM -0700, Jacob Champion wrote:
> > > By adding the new .so to a different package. For example, RPM specs
> > > would just let you say "hey, this .so I just built doesn't go into the
> > > main client package, it goes into an add-on that depends on the client
> > > package." It's the same way separate client and server packages get
> > > generated from the same single build of Postgres.
> >
> > Do we have any idea how many packagers are interested in doing this?
>
> I'm not sure how to answer this. The primary drivers from the dev side
> are you and Tom, I think. Christoph seems to be on board with a split
> as long as we don't make his life harder. Wolfgang appears to be a
> packager who would not make use of a split (and in fact cannot).
Okay, I have just posted a more detailed email about my security
concern, so let's look at that. I am ready to admit I am wrong.
--
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.
