Simon Riggs wrote:
> > For me, clarity and
> > candor gain a lot more credibility than trying to cover over missing
> > functionality in the past. I am not saying we have to be so honest that
> > we bash PostgreSQL, but in cases where we adjust wording to try to
> > prevent ourselves from looking bad, it is best to be honest and clear
> > about our limitations. I think in the long run it gains us lots of
> > credibility (and ultimately volunteers).
> I see this as merely a half-full/half-empty viewpoint issue.
> Honesty and clarity are wonderful things and I subscribe to them. Using
> them only to describe your own viewpoint is not a reasonable point to
> make in a hopefully rational discussion about writing style...
> I'll go back to my docs now, but I guess we may relive this again when
> you see some of the honest, clear and positive changes I am suggesting.
I wasn't suggesting yours were dishonest. I was saying that I was
aiming for the clearest style whether is makes PostgreSQL look good or
not. I figured saying "in the past you had to do X" was clearer than
saying "you don't have to do X anymore".
I am, of course, am open to the community's feedback on this.
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
In response to
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-07-26 06:17:10|
|Subject: Re: 7.5 release notes |
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2004-07-26 01:31:47|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 release notes|
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Christopher Kings-Lynne||Date: 2004-07-26 02:21:20|
|Subject: Re: Improvements to PostgreSQL|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2004-07-26 01:36:35|
|Subject: Re: Planning for beta (was Re: Sketch of extending error|