Re: "pgoutput" options missing on documentation

On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 1:08 PM Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > I found the existing error code appropriate because for syntax
> > specification, either we need to mandate this at the grammar level or
> > at the API level. Also, I think we should give a message similar to an
> > existing message: "publication_names parameter missing". For example,
> > we can say, "proto_version parameter missing". BTW, I also don't like
> > the other changes parse_output_parameters() done in 0001, if we want
> > to improve all the similar messages there are other places in the code
> > as well, so we can separately make the case for the same.
>
> Okay, I am changing these back. I think we should keep the word
> "option". It is used on other error messages.
>

Fair enough. I think we should push your first patch only in HEAD as
this is a minor improvement over the current behaviour. What do you
think?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.