On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11:45 AM, David E. Wheeler <da...@kineticode.com> >> wrote: >>> * I think we're going to need a formal version string spec for extensions. > >> I agree. > > I don't. We deliberately decided *not* to have any wired-in > interpretation of extension numbers, and I don't think that decision > needs to be reversed. David can choose to enforce something for stuff > distributed through PGXN if he wishes, but that's no concern of the core > server's. In particular I'm really skeptical of the theory that we need > or should want version restrictions in Requires references. The > equivalent feature in RPM is deprecated for Fedora/RedHat packaging use, > and I see no reason why we'd need it more than they do.
Oh, really? How can you possibly get by without it? Dependencies of this type are all over the place. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
