Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 8/12/06, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > More seriously: the current state of affairs is that the
> > full-disjunction code exists as a pgfoundry project.  If it's indeed the
> > second greatest thing since sliced bread, then I think we could assume
> > that people will find it and use it from pgfoundry.
> That goes back to assuming people not only know about pgfoundry, but
> are similarly willing to search it.
> > The question that's on the table is whether it needs to be in contrib right 
> > now.
> > I have not seen either a technical argument or popularity argument why it
> > ought to move into contrib.
> In addition to knowing that Tzahi has put a *very* significant amount
> of work into his research as well as this code over the past few
> months, I have to agree with several items stated by "Agent M".
> This is the *first* implementation of this concept in any database
> system, so there's not going to be anyone jumping up and down singing
> it's praises just yet.  However, when people do get a chance to play
> with it, I believe we'll have a number of them saying how useful it
> is.  There are several contrib modules still included in the system
> that aren't that heavily used... I don't see the harm in including
> this one for at least this release.  If no one uses it, take it out
> for 8.3.
> IMHO, this is just a really cool piece of technology that provides
> functionality which can't be done any other way; why not give it a
> chance?

Our distribution is not a place to experiment with things.  That's what
separate pgfoundry projects are for.  The fact we have some unusual
things in /contrib is not a reason to add more.

  Bruce Momjian   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to