Markus Wanner wrote: > Hi, > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > The bottom line is that for software to be successful we need a critical > > mass, and as long as we are doing OS-specific plugins we aren't going to > > reach that critical mass because the OS-specific aspect splits up > > demand. > > What about the pgxs toolchain? Doesn't that provide enough > OS-abstraction to be usable for projects outside of Postgres itself? If > no, why not? (I've currently only used it for extensions under different > Linuxen, so I can't tell much about OS-specific aspects of it).
pgxs is very good, but it is for interpolating server information to be used during a compile; it does not deal with packaging. > Are you proposing that we should introduce our own packaging system for > such add-on components? Like CP(g)AN (which has been proposed before..)? Yes, pretty much. I imagine some kind of web interface or Java app (did I just say that?) that lists all plugins and when you choose one it downloads an object file appropriate for your operating system plus SQL scripts and somehow automatically installs them in the desired database. That is the kind of capability we need to really advance things. We would still allow source installs but for people wanting to try things out, I see no other alternative, and "try things out" == adoption. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
