Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
От | Nathan Bossart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20230521170756.GA4034216@nathanxps13 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16
Re: createuser --memeber and PG 16 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 11:45:24AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > A few comments on the patch: Thanks for taking a look. >>> Indicates an existing role that will be automatically added as a member of the new > > "Specifies" would be clearer than "indicates" (not your fault, but > let's avoid the passive construction while we are here). Likewise > nearby. Fixed. >>> + {"member-of", required_argument, NULL, 6}, > > Why didn't you just translate this as 'g' instead of inventing > a new switch case? Fixed. *facepalm* > I think clearer would be > >>> + printf(_(" -a, --with-admin=ROLE ROLE will be a member of new role with admin\n" > > Likewise > >>> + printf(_(" -g, --member-of=ROLE new role will be a member of ROLE\n")); > > (I assume that's what this should say, it's backwards ATM) > and > >>> + printf(_(" -m, --with-member=ROLE ROLE will be a member of new role\n")); Fixed. How do folks feel about keeping --role undocumented? Should we give it a mention in the docs for --member-of? -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: