public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: David G. Johnston <[email protected]>
To: Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: pgsql-docs <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SQL command : ALTER DATABASE OWNER TO
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 14:10:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKFQuwa=LgMkEhvpP9OCjgxK5RYTBnHJoBnwyadi7cve4yhEbA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <2023185982.281851219.1646733038464.JavaMail.root@zimbra15-e2.priv.proxad.net>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAKFQuwY+RDRX-_vDUWCqgGYWr7NKJ7xo5b7kenxohL6EjUBKPg@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

Thank you for the feedback.  I've taken it into account and come up with a
partial rewrite of my first pass, and posted it to -hackers so we can close
this thread out.

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/[email protected]...

Some replies below.

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 7:35 AM Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 16:04 -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > Here's a slightly more detailed patch to consider to cover both the
> transference of ownership as well as documenting precisely what ownership
> means.
>
> Ok, you want to describe that in more detail.  But you should preserve
> the <firstterm> when the term is used for the first time.
>

Yeah, I need to get better at looking for and applying semantic markup.

Note that the documentation is careful to avoid the term "privilege"
> when speaking about the latter: below, it says "The *right* to modify or
> destroy an object is inherent in being the object's owner".
>
> We should leave that as it is.
>

Agreed.  I was going for "first encounter clarification" only, not
intending to define the term fully.  I've taken a different approach with
the new patch - not redefining the main term but adding appropriate
qualifications for limited use in learning how things work.


> I think we should say "owner" instead of "recorded owner".  Also, is it
> necessary
> to detail to the level of system catalog columns?
>
>
Agreed, with the overall flow of the content and context improved that
specific sub-paragraph can be made much simpler without loss of clarity.

David J.

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: SQL command : ALTER DATABASE OWNER TO
  In-Reply-To: <CAKFQuwa=LgMkEhvpP9OCjgxK5RYTBnHJoBnwyadi7cve4yhEbA@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox