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

Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432)

From: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432)
Date: 2009-12-03 18:23:01
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Jaime Casanova
> <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec> wrote:
>> This manual will be specific for 8.5 so i think all mentions to the
>> version should be removed
> Not sure I agree on this point.  We have similar mentions elsewhere.
In this particular example, it's bad form because it's even possible 
that 8.5 will actually be 9.0.  You don't want to refer to a version 
number that doesn't even exist for sure yet, lest it leave a loose end 
that needs to be cleaned up later if that number is changed before release.

Rewriting in terms like "in earlier versions..." instead is one 
approach.  Then people will have to manually scan earlier docs to sort 
that out, I know I end up doing that all the time.  If you want to keep 
the note specific, saying "in 8.4 and earlier versions [old behavior]" 
is better than "before 8.5 [old behavior]" because it only mentions 
version numbers that are historical rather than future.

Greg Smith    2ndQuadrant   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2009-12-03 18:50:06
Subject: Re: Catastrophic changes to PostgreSQL 8.4
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-12-03 17:53:43
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Largeobject Access Controls (r2432)

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