Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Change for connection name

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: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
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.

<!-- -->

In response to


pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Jyrki WahlstedtDate: 2007-08-02 18:47:46
Subject: Re: wxWidgets alert at start
Previous:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2007-08-02 15:48:08
Subject: Re: Change for connection name

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group