On 2020-Apr-11, Robert Haas wrote: > I *would* like to find a way to address the proliferation of binaries, > because I've got other things I'd like to do that would require > creating still more of them, and until we come up with a scalable > solution that makes everybody happy, there's going to be progressively > more complaining every time. One possible solution is to adopt the > 'git' approach and decide we're going to have one 'pg' command (or > whatever we call it). I think the way that 'git' does it is that all > of the real binaries are stored in a directory that users are not > expected to have in their path, and the 'git' wrapper just looks for > one based on the name of the subcommand.
I like this idea so much that I already proposed it in the past[1], so +1. [1] https://postgr.es/m/20160826202911.GA320593@alvherre.pgsql -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
