On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> On sön, 2012-01-15 at 18:14 -0500, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
>> I see this patch includes a small change to dropuser, to make the
>> 'username' argument mandatory if --interactive is not set, for
>> symmetry with createuser's new behavior. That's dandy, though IMO we
>> shouldn't have "-i" be shorthand for "--interactive" with dropuser,
>> and something different with createuser (i.e. we should just get rid
>> of the "i" alias for dropuser).
>
> Well, all the other tools also support -i for prompting.
Taking a look at the current ./src/bin/scripts executables, I see only
2 out of 9 (`dropdb` and `dropuser`) which have "-i" mean
"--interactive", and `reindexdb` has another meaning for "-i"
entirely. So I'm not sure there's such a clear precedent for having
"-i" mean "--interactive" within our scripts, at least.
> I'd rather get
> rid of -i for --inherit, but I fear that will break things as well. I'm
> not sure what to do.
I think breaking backwards compatibility probably won't fly (and
should probably be handled by another patch, anyway). I guess it's OK
to keep the patch's current behavior, given we are already
inconsistent about what "-i" means.
>> i.e. createuser tries taking either $PGUSER or the current username as
>> a default user to create, while dropuser just bails out. Personally, I
>> prefer just bailing out if no create/drop user is specified, but
>> either way I think they should be consistent.
>
> That is intentional long-standing behavior. createdb/dropdb work the
> same way.
OK.
Josh