On 9/5/06, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes:
> >> I also agree with Andrew that pgfoundry is not a appropriate place for
> >> userlocks. They should be properly documented with a cleaned up api.
> >> I have no objection from them being removed from contrib in the short
> >> term due to the gpl issue, although I am not sure how you can
> >> copyright a function wrapper.
> >
> > Right, I see the pgfoundry project as just a backwards-compatibility
> > thing for anyone who doesn't want to change their code. I'm happy to
> > put some cleaned-up functions into core right now (ie, for 8.2) if
> > someone will do the legwork to define and implement them.
>
> hmm - that is all a nice and such - but is it really a good idea to do
> this that late in the release-cycle ?
> I think the most "natural" thing would be to replace the existing GPL'd
> userlock code with the new one and discuss the API-change one for 8.3
> and up ...
I think that's a reasonable solution, replace the existing (renamed?)
contrib with new wrappers and push core migration/documentation out to
8.3. Then we are talking about one line wrappers here, not a feature
per se...
merlin
