Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?

On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 12:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> writes:
> > Code outside of core, is, in reality, less reviewed, less likely to work
> > well with recent PG versions, and more likely to cause problems. It's also
> > less likely to be found by people, less likely to be used by people, and
> > less likely to be included by distros. Not to say that everything should get
> > shoved into core, of course, but there are strong arguments for both sides.
>
> These are all true statements, of course, but ISTM they should be looked
> on as problems to be solved. Pushing stuff into core instead of solving
> these problems is not a scalable long-term answer.

And being in core does in no way guarantee reviews and updates if stuff
changes in the backend, as long as regression tests pass - as a proof
take a look at pl/python ugliness. it has not been updated in any major
way since it was first written and so does not make use of any newer
ways of writing PLs.

I am currently working on get this fixed, looking, ironically, much at
pl/proxy code to do so.

I was away from net for last 3 weeks, (climbed mt. Elbrus) but I'll get
my patches brushed up in 2-3 weeks to bring pl/python on par with other
PLs.

OTOH, until we have solid foundation for believing that we can move all
(or at least most) PLs out of core, I'd like pl/proxy to be "in the
core", at least "being in the core CVS" sense.

--------------
Hannu