On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 08:55:03AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > Greetings, > > * Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski (m...@komzpa.net) wrote: > > PostGIS 2.5 had raster and vector blended together in single extension. > > In PostGIS 3, they were split out into postgis and postgis_raster > > extensions. > > For my 2c, at least, I still don't really get why that split was done.
It's pretty easy to understand: to let user decide what he needs and what not. > > Removal of FROM UNPACKAGED breaks PostGIS 2.5 -> 3.0 upgrade path, and > > we haven't yet found a proper replacement since such removal wasn't > > something we were expecting. > > I agree that there probably isn't a very good path to allow an extension > to be split up like that without having to drop some things. An > alternative would have been to *not* split up postgis, but rather to > have a postgis_raster and a postgis_vector. Adding in support for other > ways to migrate a function from one extension to another would make > sense too. I think support for migrating an object between extensions DOES exist, it's just that you cannot use it from extension upgrade scripts. Anyway pgsql-hackers is not the right place for discussion. On pgsql-hackers we only want to find a future-proof way to "package existing objects into an extension". If the syntax `CREATE EXTENSION <extname> FROM UNPACKAGED` has gone, would it be ok for just: `CREATE EXTENSION <extname>` to intercept unpackaged objects and package them ? --strk;
