Dimitri Fontaine <dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> I thought the suggestion of having "version = 9.1devel" line in each
>> contrib's module extension file was a joke. It is certainly not going
>> to be sustainable in the long run -- I don't think we want to be
>> modifying all control files each release. We need to find a better way
>> to fix this.
> Naively enough, getting this from the Makefile looked obvious to me.
Putting those numbers in the Makefile instead of the control file surely
does nothing to alleviate Alvaro's maintenance concern.
However, the only way I can see to fix this "automatically" is to have
the makefiles propagate PG_VERSION_NUM (or one of the other values set
by configure) into generated control files. I don't think that's what
we want either. If we do that, then people are going to be forced to
go through an ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE cycle whether or not anything
actually changed in the extension's SQL definitions. We really only
want the extension's SQL version to change when there was a meaningful
change in the SQL commands.
I'm not sure that I see a better answer than hand-maintained version
numbers in each extension SQL file. But if that's where we're going,
they should be in the SQL files, not in either the Makefiles or control
files.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
