Re: The word "virgin" used incorrectly and probably better off replaced

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: brian(dot)williams(at)mayalane(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: The word "virgin" used incorrectly and probably better off replaced
Date: 2019-11-07 18:55:22
Message-ID: 3F23BAF9-F616-4B7A-9072-C59349F517E7@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

> On 7 Nov 2019, at 16:03, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:

> because we have not explained what a "virgin database" is.

I think this is the key observation.

> We could say "empty", which seems better suited than both "virgin" and
> "pristine" anyway.

empty is a lot better, but still isn't conveying the state of the database
without there being room for interpretation. (My grasp of the english language
isn't enough to suggest a better alternative however).

cheers ./daniel

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Flower 2019-11-07 20:36:13 Re: Adding a Column documentation is misleading
Previous Message Brian Williams 2019-11-07 18:04:28 Re: Nit: "Immutable" should be "pure"