[postgis-users] [postgis-devel] Allowing use of PostGIS EXTENSION w/out raster

Regina Obe lr at pcorp.us
Mon Oct 9 17:20:41 PDT 2017

> I meant with 4 instead of 1.

> postgis-raster-topology
> postgis-noraster-topology
> postgis-raster-notopology
> postgis-noraster-notopology

Regardless how you dice it, option 1 or 2 you still have the same headache
without manually copying files.

a) a PostGIS that offers all modes  - postgis, topology, sfcgal, tiger
geocoder, address standardizer


b) Breaking up at package level


For most packagers I would suggest not even bothering with this, build
everything as you are doing and let users decide which extensions they want
in their database


Breaking out postgis_topology and  postgis_tiger_geocoder from core is
actually kinda a silly cause they don't add any extra dependencies
That's just strk's conflating system packaging with PostgreSQL extension
packaging (neither of which he respects)

I had only entertained this idea because I know people who build their own
were having some problems with getting GDAL and it will be harder for users
on older platforms.
So I figured half an extension which other extensions can say "okay you're
postgis enough" for me to say you satisfy my "depends on postgis

BTW I think this was the big fight we had last time  why we never went
anywhere.  Stalemate.

If we break postgis _raster out into a separate extension, it will be really
hard to put it  back if we are wrong and they'll be a lot of distrust from
people because we changed the rules on people in a minor release.

With option 2 -- it's easy to move to option 1 later at PostGIS 3 when
people are prepped for big breaking changes and when the PostgreSQL
extension machinery is more flexible to handle things like
A variable that you can use to target what schema you dependent extension is
installed in.


More information about the postgis-users mailing list