Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [216.151.103.158]) by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f4CLgLA90045 for ; Sat, 12 May 2001 17:42:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f4CLgFR20116; Sat, 12 May 2001 17:42:15 -0400 (EDT) To: Bruce Momjian cc: PostgreSQL-interfaces Subject: Re: Including Perl DBI in our CVS In-reply-to: <200105122114.f4CLELo09756@candle.pha.pa.us> References: <200105122114.f4CLELo09756@candle.pha.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian message dated "Sat, 12 May 2001 17:14:21 -0400" Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 17:42:15 -0400 Message-ID: <20113.989703735@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Archive-Number: 200105/60 X-Sequence-Number: 1587 Bruce Momjian writes: > Do people want the more modern Perl DBI interface code added to our CVS > tree? Seems like it would be a good idea. Not unless our CVS becomes the master repository for DBD::Pg. We have enough problems with the existing perl5 interface being out of sync with its maintainer's copy. We don't need to be distributing obsolete copies of DBD::Pg. In fact, given that Perl people are accustomed to fetching such things from CPAN, I'm not sure we should try to distribute it as part of our releases at all... regards, tom lane