On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 11:24:19PM -0500, Regina Obe wrote: > Here is first version of my patch using the @extschema:extensionname@ syntax > you proposed. > > This patch includes: > 1) Changes to replace references of @extschema:extensionname@ with the > schema of the required extension > 2) Documentation for the feature > 3) Tests for the feature. > > There is one issue I thought about that is not addressed by this. > > If an extension is required by another extension and that required extension > schema is referenced in the extension scripts using the > @extschema:extensionname@ syntax, then ideally we should prevent the > required extension from being relocatable. This would prevent a user from > accidentally moving the required extension, thus breaking the dependent > extensions. > > I didn't add that feature cause I wasn't sure if it was overstepping the > bounds of what should be done, or if we leave it up to the user to just know > better.
An alternative would be to forbid using @extschema:extensionname@ to reference relocatable extensions. DBA can toggle relocatability of an extension to allow it to be referenced. --strk;
