Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432)
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 603c8f070912031113w248359beg4a146ae9f25cea8@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432) (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Jaime Casanova > <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec> wrote: > > This manual will be specific for 8.5 so i think all mentions to the > version should be removed > > Not sure I agree on this point. We have similar mentions elsewhere. > > In this particular example, it's bad form because it's even possible that > 8.5 will actually be 9.0. You don't want to refer to a version number that > doesn't even exist for sure yet, lest it leave a loose end that needs to be > cleaned up later if that number is changed before release. > > Rewriting in terms like "in earlier versions..." instead is one approach. > Then people will have to manually scan earlier docs to sort that out, I know > I end up doing that all the time. If you want to keep the note specific, > saying "in 8.4 and earlier versions [old behavior]" is better than "before > 8.5 [old behavior]" because it only mentions version numbers that are > historical rather than future. Ah, yes, I like "In 8.4 and earlier versions", or maybe "earlier releases". Compare: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/sql-copy.html#AEN55855 http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/runtime-config-logging.html#GUC-LOG-FILENAME ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: