Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > >>> It seems like /contrib would be more natural, no? ?/bin seems like > >>> overkill because most people will not want to run it. ?Most of /contrib > >>> is installed already by installers, I think. > > > >> At least on Red Hat, it is packaged separately. > > > > On Red Hat, it is not packaged at all (at least not by me), and won't > > be unless it goes into contrib. ?I don't believe it belongs in the > > base package. > > I confess to some confusion about what things "belong" where. Is > contrib the right place for this because we think it's half-baked, or > because we think most people won't use it, or just because we're > violently allergic to adding stuff to src/bin, or what?
I was suggesting /contrib because it seems to be of limited usefulness. I assume people want pg_upgrade to stay in /contrib for the same reason. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
