Re: [HACKERS] Scripts again

From: Peter Eisentraut <e99re41(at)DoCS(dot)UU(dot)SE>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Scripts again
Date: 1999-10-15 09:36:35
Message-ID: Pine.GSO.4.02A.9910151133480.2978-100000@Pingvin.DoCS.UU.SE
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Topic dropped.

But users should be made aware that all createdb does is call psql and the
create database SQL statement, so they see how it fits together. But I
think I have to agree with your general point here.

-Peter

On Fri, 15 Oct 1999, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> > > > Okay, I have the following voting results:
> > > > 2 for pgcreatedb, pgdropdb, pgcreateuser, pgdropuser (Bruce, me)
> > > > 1 for pg_createdb, pg_dropdb, etc. (Sergio K.)
> > > > 1/2 for pgadduser, etc., or sth. like that (Marc)
> > > > 1/2 for leave as is (Thomas)
> > > > 1 for drop altogether (Marc)
> > > I vote with Thomas - leave as is. But I don't understand the tallying.
> > > Did Thomas shrink so as to only get a halfa vote? :)
> > He didn't make his opinion exactly clear, except that the underscores are
> > a sign of the coming apocalypse. (If you ask Marc, he can probably give
> > you an alternate theory here...)
>
> OK, let me be clear. imho there is no strong consensus on this, which
> would lead us toward *leave it as it is*! I'll put Marc (motto: "no
> wusses!") on the lunatic fringe for suggesting that we drop all user
> conveniences, but istm that we are solving a problem which isn't a
> problem. And we are changing the user interface which has been in
> place for (at least) the last three years based on no documented name
> space conflict and no widely reported problems from users.
>
> I can see how some might want some clearer way to figure out available
> postgres command-line commands using ls and grep. If so, prepending
> "pg" will help, but forget the underscores and convince more of us
> that it is necessary, please. Why should a regular user have to type
> the extra two characters anyway? Should we mention in the v7.0 release
> notes that we are now "carpal tunnel hostile"??
>
> > Hmm, I guess that does it. pg_createdb and symlinks for one release with
> > warnings for deprecated forms.
>
> ack!
>
> > Perhaps we should really change the installation instructions to not make
> > mention of the scripts, though, to enforce proper learning. But you were
> > working on that anyway, right?
>
> sigh. We should get rid of all of the other language interfaces too;
> any real programmer can do it with psql and bash. Hmm, maybe even psql
> is a luxury ;)
>
> - Thomas
>
>

--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jan Wieck 1999-10-15 10:18:24 Re: [HACKERS] bison
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 1999-10-15 09:30:39 Re: [HACKERS] TAB doesn't work in psql