Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes: > I'm not a particular fan of the current initdb output and it could use a > general revision IMO. If you want to look into that, please do. But > for your particular proposed addition, let's put it somewhere it makes > sense either in the current scheme or a future scheme when that is done.
TBH, I think we should reject the current proposal outright. The target directory's name already appears twice in initdb's output; we do not need a third time. And as for the version, if you want that you can get it from "initdb --version".
I don't really see a reason not to add the version to the log output, if just for simplicity and having a self-contained stream of content.
I'm off my desire to have it be the nearly last thing to print though; having it print first actually works better since if you are interactive you'll see it pop-up just after pressing enter. Subconsciously you'll know what you are expecting to see there and if it just happens to be different you'll probably notice it. Solutions requiring additional commands/effort to retrieve the version presume one is expecting/caring about checking that value specifically, and while that may be true the simplicity combined with the benefit to people not expecting there to be an issue make adding it alongside the various others key=value settings a no-brainer for me.