Message-ID: <5567C5EB.3070703@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 21:50:35 -0400
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
 "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
CC: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely
References: <55674016.80005@commandprompt.com>
 <20150528193556.GH26667@tamriel.snowman.net>
In-Reply-To: <20150528193556.GH26667@tamriel.snowman.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 5/28/15 3:35 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> What we would need for this is an 'extensions' directory, or similar,
> and a clear definition of what the requirements are around getting into
> it are.  With that, we could decide for each module currently in contrib
> if it should go into the 'extensions' directory.  I'm not sure that we
> would necessairly have to remove the contrib module or any modules which
> are deemed to not be appropriate for the 'extensions' directory.

This seems reasonable to me.  It's in line with the recent move from
contrib to bin.  It'll just be quite a bit bigger of an undertaking.
(50 threads to discuss the merits of each module separately?)  Maybe
start by picking the top 5 and sort those out.


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