Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...]
От
Daniel Gustafsson
Тема
Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...]
Дата
Msg-id
18D6F77A-A3FD-4DEE-8C79-D719F56D262F@yesql.se
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>
Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
> On 17 Feb 2026, at 02:08, Peter Smith wrote: > Make the "option" part consistent in the synopses of all Server Applications: > > 1. "[option]" should be "[option...]" Only if the application can take multiple options. pg_controldata can for example only take a single parameter so [option] is correct there. > 2. It should be first Why? I think it makes more sense to list [option...] after required parameters just like how pg_upgrade does it. We might not be consistent as is, but I'm not sure it's a net improvement to always list it first as opposed to what we have. -- Daniel Gustafsson
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления