On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 14:28 -0500, Dave Page wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>> <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 14:10 -0500, Dave Page wrote:
>> >> That doesn't seem right - the user shouldn't see quoting, except in SQL
>> >> queries.
>> > We show the user the schema and the table names. It would be weird to
>> > display foo.bar.something if the schema name is foo.bar and the table
>> > name is something. We could use two columns, of course, but I don't
>> > really see the point.
>> > Anyway, it was already displayed that way. I just fixed the issue. So,
>> > if you want to fix the display, be my guest :)
>> My point is that you haven't actually fixed the original bug; you've
>> made it worse by further propagating the original issue.
> So, what should we do? display two columns? how will that work on the
> I agree to work on this once we've found a good way to deal with it, but
> we don't have one right now. And actually, the current patch fixes the
> OP's issue, and that's good enough for me.
Just show them unquoted as we do elsewhere. I think the
stupid.schema.name.tablename issue is a corner case that can be safely
ignored (it wouldn't be wrong per se, it just requires a little
thinking on the part of the user, which frankly serves them right :-)
For an example, look at dlgForeignKey, which shows the unquoted names
in the Reference field.
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgadmin-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Guillaume Lelarge||Date: 2011-09-20 19:29:58|
|Subject: Re: pgAdmin III commit: Fix the removing of an
|Previous:||From: Begina Felicysym||Date: 2011-09-19 20:27:50|
|Subject: Re: Polish pgAdmin website translation|