Re: FAQ.html corrections
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: FAQ.html corrections |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200501171651.j0HGpXc21164@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: FAQ.html corrections (Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>) |
Список | pgsql-www |
Robert Treat wrote: > On Monday 17 January 2005 00:01, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Josh Berkus wrote: > > > Bruce, > > > > > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > Changed. I think we have to use US spelling for consistency. I think > > > > > our docs made that adjustment too. > > > > > > Since when? We've been agnostic about US/British spellings for years. > > > For example, our license is as licence.html. > > > > Oh, I thought we had made changes for consistency in the docs. Maybe > > someone just suggested it in the past. I have not feeling one way or > > the other myself. If we could mix non-English in to the docs that would > > be cool too. > > > > I will say I can't spell most words that are different in US and UK > > anymore because I can't remember which is which anymore. License is one > > of the confusing ones. > > I just got tripped up by vacuum/explain analyze and analyse. Everwhere in the > docs we refer to it as analyze, but both work and analyse is a reserved word. > Was thinking maybe the analyze page should be updated if we don't have any > intention to move toward one or the other. Incidentally, while my opinion > may be a little coloured ;-) I do think the Z spelling is more correct, since > afaik everyone says it with z phonetics. How do you want to modify the analyze manual page? Add a mention of ANALYSE? Sure. I like supporting both spellings for user input. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: