Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 16:35:26 -0400
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, David Fetter <david@fetter.org>,
	Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>,
	Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] Show detailed table persistence in \dt+
Message-ID: <20190702203526.GA29015@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <3076E7C5-97B6-4739-9894-0E58712194CC@yesql.se>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

On 2019-Jul-02, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:

> > On 2 Jul 2019, at 22:16, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> 
> > even if we made a test case that presumed
> > --enable-nls and tried to exercise this, the lack of translations
> > for the new words would get in the way for a long while.
> 
> For testing though, couldn’t we have an autogenerated .po which has a unique
> and predictable dummy value translation for every string (the string backwards
> or something), which can be used for testing?  This is all hand-wavy since I
> haven’t tried actually doing it, but it seems a better option than waiting for
> .po files to be available.  Or am I missing the point of the value of the
> discussed test?

Hmm, no, I think that's precisely it, and that sounds like a pretty good
starter idea ... but I wouldn't want to be the one to have to set this
up -- it seems pretty laborious.

Anyway I'm not objecting to the patch -- I agree that we're already not
testing translatability and that this patch shouldn't be forced to start
doing it.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services