On 10 June 2015 at 14:41, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 03:54:59PM -0400, David Steele wrote: >> I've certainly had quite the experience as a first-time contributor >> working on this patch. Perhaps I bit off more than I should have and I >> definitely managed to ruffle a few feathers along the way. I learned a >> lot about how the community works, both the good and the bad. Fear not, >> though, I'm not so easily discouraged and you'll definitely be hearing >> more from me. > > Glad to hear it. > >> The stated purpose of contrib is: "include porting tools, analysis >> utilities, and plug-in features that are not part of the core PostgreSQL >> system, mainly because they address a limited audience or are too >> experimental to be part of the main source tree. This does not preclude >> their usefulness." >> >> Perhaps we should consider modifying that language, because from my >> perspective pg_audit fit the description perfectly. > > "What is contrib?" attracts enduring controversy; see recent thread "RFC: > Remove contrib entirely" for the latest episode. However that discussion > concludes, that documentation passage is not too helpful as a guide to > predicting contrib patch reception. (Most recent contrib additions had an > obvious analogy to an existing module, sidestepping the question.)
Is pg_audit being resubmitted for 9.6 at all? Thom -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers