On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 15:29, Marko Kreen <mark...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: >> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:25, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> Some of my personal discussions of this topic have suggested that some other >>> popular extensions like pgcrypto and hstore get converted too. I think >>> those all fail test (3), and I'm not actually sure where pgcrypto adds any >>> special dependency/distribution issues were it to be moved to the main >>> database package. If this general idea catches on, a wider discussion of >>> what else should get "promoted" to this extensions area would be >>> appropriate. The ones I picked seemed the easiest to justify by this >>> criteria set. >> >> pgcrypto would cause trouble for any builds *without* SSL. I don't >> think any packagers do that, but people doing manual builds would >> certainly get different results. > > What kind of trouble? It should work fine without SSL.
Oh, you're right - it does. But it does provide different functionalties? Or does it actually do exactly the same stuff, just in different ways? -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
