Re: Use "protocol options" name instead of "protocol extensions" everywhere

On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 10:51 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
> Bikeshedding time:
>
> "protocol option" makes me think of GUCs.
>
> "optional protocol features" perhaps. A bit long though..
>
> Or keep using "protocol extension" and add a paragraph to the docs to
> say explicitly that there's no support for extensions to create protocol
> extensions. TLS extensions is a good comparison.
>
> I don't have a strong opinion, all of those would work for me.

I don't particularly like "optional protocol features". I find
"protocol extensions" to be mildly clearer than "protocol options,"
but only mildly.

I don't think it's really viable to promise that we'll never talk
about extending anything other than in the context of what CREATE
EXTENSION does.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com