From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Read-only vs read only vs readonly |
Date: | 2021-09-02 18:20:36 |
Message-ID: | CABUevExuxKwn0YM3+wdSeQSvK6CRrJ-hewocGVX3R4-xVX4eMw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I had a customer point out to me that we're inconsistent in how we
spell read-only. Turns out we're not as inconsistent as I initially
thought :), but that they did manage to spot the one actual log
message we have that writes it differently than everything else -- but
that broke their grepping...
Almost everywhere we use read-only. Attached patch changes the one log
message where we didn't, as well as a few places in the docs for it. I
did not bother with things like comments in the code.
Two questions:
1. Is it worth fixing? Or just silly nitpicking?
2. What about translations? This string exists in translations --
should we just "fix" it there, without touching the translated string?
Or try to fix both? Or leave it for the translators who will get a
diff on it?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
readonly.patch | text/x-patch | 4.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2021-09-02 18:50:00 | Re: SQL/JSON: functions |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2021-09-02 18:09:57 | Re: Is it safe to use the extended protocol with COPY? |