| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling |
| Date: | 2011-02-14 00:49:31 |
| Message-ID: | EB604FD0-A3B1-488D-8806-7B6D98831852@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Feb 13, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I sure would like it if the install script with no version in it corresponded to the latest version. Otherwise, one must rename the file every time one does a release. And as you're noting, you lose Git history that way.
>
> (1) git does know it's a rename, it's just not default for git diff to
> show it that way.
I see, looks like one can `git diff --follow` to see it that way:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2314652/
> (2) I think that the normal use-case would not involve removing the old
> file, so this is moot anyhow.
Oh. So one normally will ship, for an extension "foo", only "foo.sql" and any necssary upgrade scripts?
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-14 00:59:54 | Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-14 00:46:48 | Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling |