From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Help text for pg_basebackup -R |
Date: | 2017-02-17 15:02:19 |
Message-ID: | 20170217150219.GP9812@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Alvaro Herrera (alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 15, 2017, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > >
> > > > printf(_(" -R, --write-recovery-conf\n"
> > > > - " write recovery.conf
> > > after backup\n"));
> > > > + " write recovery.conf for
> > > replication\n"));
> > > > printf(_(" -S, --slot=SLOTNAME replication slot to use\n"));
> > >
> > > LGTM.
> > >
> > I'm guessing if we backpatch something like that, it would cause issues for
> > translations, right? So we should make it head only?
>
> We've had the argument a number of times. My stand is that many
> translators are active in the older branches, so this update would be
> caught there too; and even if not, an updated English message is better
> than an outdated native-language message.
That makes sense to me, at least, so +1, for my part. Of course, I'm
not a translation-using user, but I have heard from people when I've
spoken in other countries that a correct english message is better than
outdated native-language messages, and further, that having the English
message makes it easier to get Google results.
Thanks!
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-02-17 15:14:38 | Re: Logical Replication and Character encoding |
Previous Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2017-02-17 14:51:58 | Question about memory contexts in ReindexMultipleTables() |