Re: Change for connection name

Kevin Macdonald a écrit :
>> not sure if it looks too techy though
>
> I think so too; it's also a bit wordy. From my experience in an Oracle
> shop, few DBAs are programmer-type people.
>
> However, the choice could be controlled within "File->Options".
>

I don't think a choice is needed here. Moreover, it adds complexity and
this is not what we want on a beta phase.

> A simple alternative to the complexity would simply be
>
> "dpage(at)server_name" -- who you are, and what you connected to.
>
> where "server_name" is what you typed for "name" when you clicked on the
> "wall plug" and established a new server/connection.
>
> I think the low-level details (server URL, port, database) is too much;
> if a person wants these details, they can right-click on a server and
> choose "Properties..."
>

We need the database name "detail" because the server name doesn't imply
it. And using server name is great if you don't change it. I think we
really need every details, URL form or "verbose" form.

--
Guillaume.
<!-- http://abs.traduc.org/
http://lfs.traduc.org/
http://docs.postgresqlfr.org/ -->