From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: whats the deal with -u ? |
Date: | 2007-12-10 00:37:50 |
Message-ID: | 20071210003750.GA5624@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>
> > The manual explains it:
> > This option is deprecated, as it is conceptually flawed. (Prompting for a
> > non-default user name and prompting for a password because the server
> > requires it are really two different things.) You are encouraged to look
> > at the -U and -W options instead.
>
> Hmm. The point about the forced password prompt is certainly valid,
> but I see nothing wrong with the idea of having an option to prompt
> for the username. What if we just took out the forced password prompt,
> on the grounds that you can get that with "-u -W" if you want it?
Yes, undeprecating it then makes sense.
I have never understood what's the point of having an option to force a
password prompt. I wonder why don't we deprecate -W?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.advogato.org/person/alvherre
"Cada quien es cada cual y baja las escaleras como quiere" (JMSerrat)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-12-10 00:44:08 | Re: whats the deal with -u ? |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-12-10 00:36:17 | Re: Release Note Changes |