"David E. Wheeler" <da...@kineticode.com> writes:
> On Feb 13, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (2) I think that the normal use-case would not involve removing the old
>> file, so this is moot anyhow.
> Oh. So one normally will ship, for an extension "foo", only "foo.sql" and any
> necssary upgrade scripts?
I think after a couple of releases you'd be shipping something like
foo--1.0.sql
foo--1.1.sql
foo--1.0--1.1.sql
foo--2.0.sql
foo--1.1--2.0.sql
and it'll soon get to be a mess if your SCM doesn't clearly distinguish
which is which.
Also, as I mentioned before, once you've branched off foo--1.1.sql
it's probably a mistake to be changing foo--1.0.sql anymore anyway.
I suppose if you really wanted foo.sql to always be the head version,
you could do something like "cp foo.sql foo--$VERSION.sql" as part of
the build process in the Makefile.
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
