On Jan 3, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > "David E. Wheeler" <da...@kineticode.com> writes: >> The fact that the last two messages in the thread say something else >> does not mean that they represent the consensus. > > Yeah, but as I'm the one writing the code, I gave myself more than one > vote. And did consider the alternatives but didn't like them so much.
Just so long as you're aware that you might get more challenges on this going forward. > Most are, but it's not for granted. See adminpack. Or earthdistance > that I had to make not-relocatable for lack of dependency support, as it > depends on cube and ALTER EXTENSION earthdistance SET SCHEMA foo would > have relocated cube too. We said dependency can wait until v2. > > I don't see the benefit of having the 'relocatable' property optional in > the control file, but I see a huge drawback. Requiring it will force > extension authors to at least have a glance at the docs to understand > how to set it. It's important not to overlook it. I guess. I'll have to think about how to support it in PGXN, though. And the upgrade keys if they stay in. David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
