Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling

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: 2011-02-12 23:34:13
Message-ID: FB899F09-F305-492A-B495-71FDA99829FA@kineticode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Feb 12, 2011, at 3:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> "David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
>> On Feb 12, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I did think of another idea besides forbidding dash in extension names:
>>> what if we use double dash as the name/version separator,
>
>> +1 You might even consider mandating a double-dash between versions, so that they could have dashes:
>> extension--oldversion--newversion.sql
>
> Hm. I think we'd still have to disallow dash as the first or last
> character in a version name to make that unambiguous. Not sure it's
> worth the trouble.

How likely is *that*?

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-02-12 23:37:53 Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-02-12 23:12:43 Re: Extensions vs PGXS' MODULE_PATHNAME handling