"David E. Wheeler" <da...@kineticode.com> writes:
> On May 18, 2011, at 10:30 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
>> The other problem is that the facility we need to provide the most is
>> binary distributions (think apt-get). Lots of site won't ever compile
>> stuff on their production servers. So while PGXN is a good tool, it's
>> not a universal answer.
> Yeah, I would think that, *if* we were to seriously look at deprecating
> contrib (and I'm not suggesting that at all), one would *first* need to solve
> the binary distribution problems.
> I think building tools so that PGXN distributions are automatically harvested
> and turned into StackBuilder/RPM/.deb binaries would be the place to start on
> that.
Hmmm ... I think the real point of those policies about "no source
builds" is to ensure that their systems are only running code that's
been vetted to some degree by a responsible person (ie, an authorized
packager for whatever distro they run). So any sort of automated
collection of packages would go directly against what the policies are
trying to accomplish, and would likely lead to the policies being
amended to specifically ban use of your repo :-(
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
