Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71D021337B80
	for <pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  7 Feb 2011 11:08:17 -0400 (AST)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 91164-01 for
	<pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  7 Feb 2011 15:08:07 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AD8E1337BAE
	for <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>; Mon,  7 Feb 2011 11:08:06 -0400 (AST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id p17F853I015596;
	Mon, 7 Feb 2011 10:08:05 -0500 (EST)
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
	PostgreSQL-documentation <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: remove tags. 
In-reply-to: <AANLkTim7FZvuqRB7r7yxcxFKgD0F241ue6o6BcxRUoX-@mail.gmail.com> 
References: <AANLkTi=ytYtfkYYcb+_=JR=sByAwXNHD-J4-+T_EefaC@mail.gmail.com>
	<201102071454.p17EskV22239@momjian.us>
	<AANLkTim7FZvuqRB7r7yxcxFKgD0F241ue6o6BcxRUoX-@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
	message dated "Mon, 07 Feb 2011 09:58:15 -0500"
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 10:08:05 -0500
Message-ID: <15595.1297091285@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9,
	T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 201102/31
X-Sequence-Number: 6379

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Which way did we more commonly do it before you applied this patch?

We don't have a standard for this, and an undocumented patch applied
without any discussion doesn't create one.  It's hopeless to imagine
that you'll ever achieve any uniformity that way.  It won't last long
if you do, since you're outnumbered by committers who won't be following
whatever you think the convention is.

I'm not even sure why you're trying --- I don't think it even makes
sense to try to have a standard about this.  I can easily imagine that
integer constants might read better with <literal> in some contexts
and better without in others.

			regards, tom lane