Message-ID: <51266223.803@dunslane.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 13:06:27 -0500
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:15.0) Gecko/20120827 Thunderbird/15.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
CC: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>,
	pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [DOCS] Contrib module "xml2" status
References: 
 <CAB8KJ=jzPCM2BT8KcoNnydzPFk-rMvKWP99WNXegW3bWaeu7pw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoZkD+HVkNTEHLUKMwVB79_yTLk40v-ve=QSyugaLJh2sQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABUevEyPUp6aP2svQmvCUHBN=_2pqA+JobrdLqWCHHj1+fbwkg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CABUevEyPUp6aP2svQmvCUHBN=_2pqA+JobrdLqWCHHj1+fbwkg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org


On 02/21/2013 12:56 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Ian Lawrence Barwick
>> <barwick@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm not sure if this is a documentation or hackers issue, but the
>>> documentation page for contrib module "xml2" refers to PostgreSQL 8.4 in the
>>> future tense:
>>>
>>>     "It is planned that this module will be removed in PostgreSQL 8.4 in
>>> favor of the newer standard API"
>>>
>>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/xml2.html
>>>
>>> Are there any plans to remove this module by a forseeable date?
>> Nope.  I have repeatedly been voted down on removing it, and I've also
>> been repeatedly voted down on removing the deprecation text.  Could we
>> at least agree on changing the deprecation text to say "This module is
>> deprecated and may be removed in a future release"?
> Not reopening the actual discussion about rmeoving it, but assuming
> we're not, strong +1 on changing the deprecation message. And don't
> forget to backpatch the change so it shows up in the old versions of
> the docs as well.
>


Yes, we should change it to remove the reference to 8.4. The point is we 
can remove the module when someone fixes and replaces the functionality 
that's left in there that some people rely on. So far nobody has stepped 
up to the plate, although now that we have lateral a sane replacement 
for xpath_table might well be a lot easier to achieve.  If someone is 
interested in working on this I'd be happy to hear about it. Maybe it 
would be a good Google SOC project.

cheers

andrew


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers