On Dec 10, 2010, at 2:55 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >> If we assume the target is the current version, then we only need the >> old-version number in the file name, so it doesn't matter how many >> parts it has. > > IIUC, that puts even more work on the shoulders of the extension > authors, because the file named foo-1.12.sql is the one used to upgrade > from 1.12. That means that at each release, it's a different file > content, it's there to upgrade to a newer release.
Yeah, it should be *to* 1.12. FWIW, this is how Bricolage upgrade scripts are handled: version-string-named directories with the appropriate scripts to upgrade *to* the named version number. > So, we have a sound proposal for the ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE command, > which comes later. So we keep version numbers in the CREATE EXTENSION > patch and the control files, and remove the facility to get this number > from the Makefile. Is that right? Yes. No new variables in Makefile at all IIUC. Best, David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
