public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedRe: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...]
2+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...]
@ 2026-02-23 14:47 Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>
2026-03-16 01:21 ` Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Peter Smith <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Gustafsson @ 2026-02-23 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Peter Smith <[email protected]>; +Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
> On 17 Feb 2026, at 02:08, Peter Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> Make the "option" part consistent in the synopses of all Server Applications:
>
> 1. "[option]" should be "[option...]"
Only if the application can take multiple options. pg_controldata can for
example only take a single parameter so [option] is correct there.
> 2. It should be first
Why? I think it makes more sense to list [option...] after required parameters
just like how pg_upgrade does it. We might not be consistent as is, but I'm
not sure it's a net improvement to always list it first as opposed to what we
have.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...]
2026-02-23 14:47 Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>
@ 2026-03-16 01:21 ` Peter Smith <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Peter Smith @ 2026-03-16 01:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>; +Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 1:48 AM Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On 17 Feb 2026, at 02:08, Peter Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Make the "option" part consistent in the synopses of all Server Applications:
> >
> > 1. "[option]" should be "[option...]"
>
> Only if the application can take multiple options. pg_controldata can for
> example only take a single parameter so [option] is correct there.
>
You are correct. Thanks for pointing it out.
> > 2. It should be first
>
> Why? I think it makes more sense to list [option...] after required parameters
> just like how pg_upgrade does it. We might not be consistent as is, but I'm
> not sure it's a net improvement to always list it first as opposed to what we
> have.
>
This patch/thread was primarily about #1, which turned out to be
mistaken. The #2 re-ordering part was just done at the same time, but
got it no support
So, I am withdrawing this patch.
======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-03-16 01:21 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-02-23 14:47 Re: DOCS - Server Applications [option] should be [option...] Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>
2026-03-16 01:21 ` Peter Smith <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox