Re: Survey: renaming/removing script binaries (createdb, createuser...)

On 28/03/2008, Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Agree, except I would prefer "pg" instead of "pgc".
>
> With "pg" I am sure that the comand is "generic to the extreme", so I don't
> have to assume what does "c" stand for. Control? Create? Client? or Command.
>
> Also its about 33% shorter. ;-)

And it's been taken for about 35 years by a Unix command called "page".
>From its man-page.

PG(1) User Commands PG(1)

NAME
pg - browse pagewise through text files

I really find this whole discussion quite silly; it's about someone's
personal preference? Don't get me wrong, I'm a lowly user when it
comes to pg, and not a member of the hacker-community. But I've
been using postgres for a good number of years now (since v7, I think)
and have become quite accustomed to the names of the tools in
use, have never observed any clashes with other tools, and as a
Linux/Unix sys-admin type of person never had a problem with
mistaking createuser for useradd or adduser.

And I'll stick by the old maxim: if it ain't broken, don't fix it.

> Regards,
>
> Dawid

Cheers,
Andrej

> PS: And I feel it feels more natural to say "pg createuser" than "pgc
> create user", but that's solely my "typing impression".

And it's noticeably shorter to just type createuser ;} ... which worked a
treat for many many moons.

Cheers,
Andrej

--
Please don't top post, and don't use HTML e-Mail :} Make your quotes concise.

http://www.american.edu/econ/notes/htmlmail.htm