Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iT5gg-0003tO-6O for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 14:56:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iT5ge-0007qv-3N for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 14:56:32 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iT5gd-0007qn-SZ for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 14:56:31 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iT5ga-0000cq-F2 for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 14:56:30 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id xA8EuMup000641; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 09:56:22 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Alvaro Herrera cc: Daniel Gustafsson , Bruce Momjian , brian.williams@mayalane.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: The word "virgin" used incorrectly and probably better off replaced In-reply-to: <20191108131014.GA27568@alvherre.pgsql> References: <20191108131014.GA27568@alvherre.pgsql> Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera message dated "Fri, 08 Nov 2019 10:10:14 -0300" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <639.1573224982.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 09:56:22 -0500 Message-ID: <640.1573224982@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Alvaro Herrera writes: > Here's a proposed patch. I don't like this wording much, because "no user-defined objects" is not a sufficient specification of what we are talking about. You need to also capture the property that none of the system- defined objects have been altered. Now that we explicitly support things like altering the ACLs of system-defined objects, I do not think it's okay to take that part for granted. regards, tom lane