From: | "Joel Jacobson" <joel(at)compiler(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Nathan Bossart" <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Add ACL (Access Control List) acronym |
Date: | 2024-06-24 19:46:36 |
Message-ID: | 628ceb7a-3b33-4498-8d05-d5dc88512d44@app.fastmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, at 18:02, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 8:44 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I think we could omit "i.e. privileges list."
>>
>
> Agreed. Between the docs and code we say "privileges list" once and
> that refers to the dumputIls description of the arguments to grant. As
> the acronym page now defines the term using fundamentals, introducing
> another term not used elsewhere seems undesirable.
New version attached.
> Observations:
> We are referencing a disambiguation page. We never actually spell out
> ACL anywhere so we might as well just reference what Wikipedia believes
> is the expected spelling.
>
> The page we link to uses "permissions" while we consistently use
> "privileges" to describe the contents of the list. This seems like an
> obvious synonym, but as the point of these is to formally define
> things, pointing this equivalence is worth considering.
I like this idea. How could this be implemented in the docs? Maybe a <note>...</note> for ACL in acronyms.sgml?
/Joel
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-Add-ACL-Access-Control-List-acronym.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2024-06-24 19:47:34 | Re: Proposal: Document ABI Compatibility |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2024-06-24 19:44:25 | Unusually long checkpoint time on version 16, and 17beta1 running in a docker container |