On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: >>>> Here is what I have, 6 votes clearly stated: >>>> 1. Rename nothing: Daniel, >>>> 2. Rename directory only: Andres >>>> 3. Rename everything: Stephen, Vladimir, David S, Michael P (with >>>> aliases for functions, I could live without at this point...) > >> [ vote-counting ] > >> Therefore, I plan to go ahead and do #3. Somebody's probably going to >> jump in now with another opinion but I think this thread's gone on >> long enough. > > Agreed, let's just get it done. > > Although this doesn't really settle whether we ought to do 3a (with > backwards-compatibility function aliases in core) or 3b (without 'em). > Do people want to re-vote, understanding that those are the remaining > choices?
I prefer (3c) put them in an extension and let people that need 'em install 'em, but not have them available by default. If the only choices are (3a) and (3b) then I guess I pick (3b), but I think an extension doesn't cost much and will ease the migration pain for users so I'm in favor of it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers