Re: Add --{no-,}bypassrls flags to createuser

Thank you for the reviews!

On 2022-04-26 05:19, Nathan Bossart wrote:

> -    printf(_("  -g, --role=ROLE           new role will be a member of 
> this role\n"));
> +    printf(_("  -g, --role=ROLE        new role will be a member of this 
> role\n"));
> This looks lik an unexpected change.

I fixed it.


>> I'm ok with -m/--member as well (like with --role only one role can be
>> specified per switch instance so member, not membership, the later 
>> meaning,
>> at least for me, the collective).
>> 
>> That -m doesn't match --role-to is no worse than -g not matching 
>> --role, a
>> short option seems worthwhile, and the -m (membership) mnemonic should 
>> be
>> simple to pick-up.
>> 
>> I don't see the addition of "-name" to the option name being 
>> beneficial.
>> 
>> Yes, the standard doesn't use the "TO" prefix for "ROLE" - but taking 
>> that
>> liberty for consistency here is very appealing and there isn't another 
>> SQL
>> clause that it would be confused with.
> 
> +1 for "member".  It might not be perfect, but IMO it's the clearest
> option.

Thanks! I changed the option "--membership" to "--member".


For now, I also think "-m / --member" is the best choice, although it is 
ambiguous:(
I'd like to hear others' opinions.

regards


--
Shinya Kato
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION