| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: The Contrib Roundup (long) |
| Date: | 2005-06-08 20:47:21 |
| Message-ID: | 13503.1118263641@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I think this is out of the question both because these categories are fuzzy
>> and it would destroy the CVS history.
> Why would it destroy the history? Its easy enough to move the files to a
> subdirectory without losing any history ... hell, we did it when we moved
> JDBC/ODBC out of core, the history was maintained ...
I don't think you can just move the files --- that will break future
builds of the back branches (unless you intend to make the rearrangement
retroactive).
I agree with Peter's point anyway: the main value of classifying these
things is for documentation, and just structuring the top-level README
that way would be sufficient. Physically changing the hierarchy is just
much more work than it's worth.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2005-06-08 21:28:29 | Re: autovacuum in backend? |
| Previous Message | Yann Michel | 2005-06-08 20:40:28 | Account in postgresql database |