Re: ensure, not insure

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ensure, not insure
Date: 2023-11-09 15:00:12
Message-ID: 1001677.1699542012@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I've pushed this. I backpatched due to the typo in the fsync GUC
> description. I'd have only pushed to master if it were just the
> comment typos.

FTR, I do not think you should have back-patched. You created extra
work for the translation team, and the mistake is subtle enough that
it wasn't worth that. (My dictionary says that "insure and ensure
are often interchangeable, particularly in US English".)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nazir Bilal Yavuz 2023-11-09 15:11:33 Re: Failure during Building Postgres in Windows with Meson
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2023-11-09 14:58:48 Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query