From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
        brian.williams@mayalane.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: The word "virgin" used incorrectly and probably better off
 replaced
In-reply-to: <20191108163007.GA1228@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <20191108163007.GA1228@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Fri, 08 Nov 2019 13:30:07 -0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <11819.1573231319.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 11:41:59 -0500
Message-ID: <11820.1573231319@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2019-Nov-08, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So the patch becomes s/virgin/pristine/g plus add a parenthetical
>> definition for the first use?  Works for me.

> Well, there are three uses of the word "virgin".  The first is for
> "virgin user", and the patch turns that into just "user".

Uh, no, read the next lines.  In both cases those are referring
to "virgin user database" or "virgin database", and this patch
is removing an important qualifier.  It needs to be s/virgin/pristine/
in all these places.

Since the third case is well separated from the other two, maybe
we need to repeat the parenthetical definition there too.

			regards, tom lane