Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > I don't see what that does for you. This is still all being examined by > a particular major release of PG, so what will it do with a require that > specifies some other major release? Nothing useful. And there's a very > significant downside, which is that this takes us right back to the > make-work of having to change all the contrib modules' control files in > every release cycle.
Mmm, yes we're missing the | operator for dependencies here. I didn't expect extensions that support more than one major version at a time to use the feature, but obviously that's not good enough. > Once again, I see the version numbers as being specifiers for versions > of the install script files. Not the Postgres version those files are > being run in. Confusing the two is a bad idea. Confusing the install > script version numbers with minor release numbers (bugfix level > identifiers) is even worse. You *don't* want to change these numbers if > you're just fixing a bug at the C code level. Agreed on the C side maintenance and releasing. What if your extension is PL/pgSQL only and you just fixed a bug in one of the functions? -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
