On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Fabien COELHO <coe...@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
> > FWIW, I don't mind which one we put in core and which one we put out of >> core. But I like Joshua's idea of getting rid of contribs and pushing them >> out as any other extensions. >> > > Hmmm. > > I like the contrib directory as a living example of "how to do an > extension" directly available in the source tree. It also allows to test > in-tree that the extension mechanism works. So I think it should be kept at > least with a minimum set of dummy examples for this purpose, even if all > current extensions are moved out. > It is mostly an example of "How to do an contrib module" rather than "how to do an extension". There are differences between those things regarding the the USE_PGXS and some other things. If we want to keep it as an example of what we want people to do in the future, it needs be a really good example. And if we want to step new things from going into contrib, we wouldn't want to provide an example of how to put new things into it. > > Also, removing a feature is a regression, and someone is always bound to > complain... What is the real benefit? ISTM that it is a solution that fixes > no important problem. Reaching a consensus about what to move here or there > will consume valuable time that could be spent on more important tasks... > Is it worth it? > Yeah, I don't really see the benefit either. Some could be moved to core, and some could just be removed, but many of them it just seems like we would end up inventing a new 'contrib' to which is the same as the old, but with a different name. Cheers, Jeff
