From: | John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: fix typos |
Date: | 2022-08-16 01:48:27 |
Message-ID: | CAFBsxsHeOC+ipxHJkd71EOg+PnKdA+KAzeGwEK9_1t7pvA2buA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 8:55 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > This is really a straw-man proposal, since I'm not volunteering to do
> > the work, or suggest anybody else should do the same. That being the
> > case, it seems we should just go ahead with Justin's patch for
> > consistency. Possibly we could also change the messages to say "ID"?
>
> I'd be content if we change the user-facing messages (and documentation
> if any) to say "ID" not "OID".
The documentation has both, so it makes sense to standardize on "ID".
The messages all had oid/OID, which I changed in the attached. I think
I got all the places.
I'm thinking it's not wrong enough to confuse people, but consistency
is good, so backpatch to v15 and no further. Does anyone want to make
a case otherwise?
--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v1-consistently-refer-to-roident-as-ID-in-messages-and-docs.patch | text/x-patch | 4.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2022-08-16 02:14:25 | Re: SQL/JSON features for v15 |
Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2022-08-16 01:39:25 | Re: Propose a new function - list_is_empty |