Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Stephen Frost
<sfrost@snowman.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2018-07-31T22:34:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 23/07/2018 18:32, Andrew Gierth wrote: >>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > > Tom> As I said before, I think that we should change the existing > Tom> contrib modules to be coded likewise, all using a single -I switch > Tom> that points at SRCDIR/contrib. That'd help give people the right > Tom> coding model to follow. > > I don't see that playing nicely with PGXS? I'm also not on board that my random third-party extension now has to refer to its own header files as "subdirectory/headerfile.h". Which will mess up existing extensions that have header files in their tree. Or at least I'm not totally sure what the exact proposal and real-world implications are, with regard to existing extensions with one or more header files. By all means, let's make it easier for large or small extensions to manage their header files with PGXS. But let's separate what PGXS can and should do from what the extension's own file layout is. But I think there are some fundamentally incompatible goals here with regard to how the final -I options are supposed to look. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Commits
-
Fix out-of-tree build for transform modules.
- f1ca5a654d5d 11.0 landed
- 60f6756f9225 12.0 landed
-
Provide for contrib and pgxs modules to install include files.
- df163230b92b 12.0 landed
- d06eebce5fa4 11.0 landed