From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SSI error messages |
Date: | 2011-07-15 18:33:34 |
Message-ID: | 4885.1310754814@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Jul 15, 2011, at 12:06 PM, "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
>> I have a suspicion that we might sometimes find the information
>> conveyed by the detail useful when responding to users with
>> questions; but the language as it stands seems confusing for users.
> I think removing info here or making it harder to get would be a mistake.
Agreed. If we can clarify the messages, and/or make sure the
terminology they use is documented, that'd be a good thing; but let's
not just remove them.
I think that Peter's real concern is whether these are worth
translating, and I share that doubt. Perhaps we should invent an
errdetail_internal, parallel to errmsg_internal, that works like
errdetail but doesn't treat the message as a candidate for translation?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Yeb Havinga | 2011-07-15 18:51:40 | Re: Three patches which desperately need reviewers |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-07-15 18:10:26 | Re: SSI error messages |