Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fabien COELHO
Subject Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely
Date
Msg-id alpine.DEB.2.10.1505290750050.24520@sto
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely  (Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>)
Responses Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely  (Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>)
Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> FWIW, I don't mind which one we put in core and which one we put out of
> core. But I like Joshua's idea of getting rid of contribs and pushing them
> out as any other extensions.

Hmmm.

I like the contrib directory as a living example of "how to do an 
extension" directly available in the source tree. It also allows to test 
in-tree that the extension mechanism works. So I think it should be kept 
at least with a minimum set of dummy examples for this purpose, even if 
all current extensions are moved out.

Also, removing a feature is a regression, and someone is always bound to 
complain... What is the real benefit? ISTM that it is a solution that 
fixes no important problem. Reaching a consensus about what to move here 
or there will consume valuable time that could be spent on more important 
tasks... Is it worth it?

Also moving things into postgresql main sources makes pg heavier for all 
and benefits only to some, so I think that some careful filtering must be 
done bevore moving large contribs there. I guess this is part of the 
argumentation.

-- 
Fabien.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Guillaume Lelarge
Date:
Subject: Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely