Re: Change for connection name

Dave Page a écrit :
> Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
>> 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.
>>
>>
>
> Let's just use the form you proposed originally - I'll crawl back in my
> hole and stop making silly suggestions :-)
>

Done.

I like having suggestions and ideas :)

--
Guillaume.
<!-- http://abs.traduc.org/
http://lfs.traduc.org/
http://docs.postgresqlfr.org/ -->