From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, Devrim GUNDUZ <devrim(at)tr(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL Password Cracker |
Date: | 2003-01-04 01:08:03 |
Message-ID: | 23571.1041642483@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> But it is a "sect1" in libpq. It should be a "sect1" somewhere that
> makes more sense.
> ...
> It doesn't belong in libpq, and it doesn't belong in the Programmer's
> Guide.
How could it not belong in libpq? But you are right that the
Programmer's Guide seems the wrong place for information that is
important to end-users.
Perhaps libpq needs to have a chapter in the User's Guide as well as a
chapter in the Programmer's Guide? Or maybe we could put the relevant
information into a reference page under PostgreSQL Client Applications
(titled something along the line of "common behavior of all libpq-based
client applications").
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-04 01:19:20 | Re: Upgrading rant. |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-01-04 00:43:45 | Re: PostgreSQL Password Cracker |