From: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Macdonald <kevin(dot)macdonald(at)pentura(dot)ca> |
Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgadmin-hackers <pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Change for connection name |
Date: | 2007-08-02 15:56:28 |
Message-ID: | 46B1FEAC.4020203@lelarge.info |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgadmin-hackers |
Kevin Macdonald a écrit :
>> not sure if it looks too techy though
>
> I think so too; it's also a bit wordy. From my experience in an Oracle
> shop, few DBAs are programmer-type people.
>
> However, the choice could be controlled within "File->Options".
>
I don't think a choice is needed here. Moreover, it adds complexity and
this is not what we want on a beta phase.
> A simple alternative to the complexity would simply be
>
> "dpage(at)server_name" -- who you are, and what you connected to.
>
> where "server_name" is what you typed for "name" when you clicked on the
> "wall plug" and established a new server/connection.
>
> I think the low-level details (server URL, port, database) is too much;
> if a person wants these details, they can right-click on a server and
> choose "Properties..."
>
We need the database name "detail" because the server name doesn't imply
it. And using server name is great if you don't change it. I think we
really need every details, URL form or "verbose" form.
--
Guillaume.
<!-- http://abs.traduc.org/
http://lfs.traduc.org/
http://docs.postgresqlfr.org/ -->
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jyrki Wahlstedt | 2007-08-02 18:47:46 | Re: wxWidgets alert at start |
Previous Message | Guillaume Lelarge | 2007-08-02 15:48:08 | Re: Change for connection name |