Message-ID: <38024928.15ACDB91@perio.unlp.edu.ar>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:31:36 -0300
From: "Sergio A. Kessler" <ser@perio.unlp.edu.ar>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brook Milligan <brook@biology.nmsu.edu>
CC: maillist@candle.pha.pa.us, lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu,
	pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org, pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [INTERFACES] Next release is 7.0(?)
References: <199910111543.LAA29508@candle.pha.pa.us>
	<199910111656.KAA17620@biology.nmsu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Brook Milligan wrote:
> 
>    > I hope we don't have a consensus on this. Long commands with
>    > underscores in them are certainly another sign of the coming
>    > apocalypse ;)
> 
>    But if we keep symlinks to the existing names, is that OK?
> 
> Isn't the point to avoid naming conflicts.  Symlinks won't help that,
> surely.

my suggestion was:
in 7.0: provide symlinks for backward compatibility and make big
warnings 'don't use createuser, etc. they are deprecated'
all over the place ...
in 7.1: remove the symlinks.

> I agree; underscores are a pain.  If you must go this direction, I
> suggest hyphens (-).

yup, but maybe (-) can rise problems in some filesystems ...
(I certainly don't know)
and more importantly you have then to rename pg_dump and pg_dumpall
wich is the more heavily used command in scripts ...
my idea was to leave this commands untouched.

as for longnames that Thomas doesn't like (wich I don't agree because
my idea for upgrading scripts is just: 'prepend a pg_ to the commands')
what about pg_adduser, pg_deluser, pg_adddb, etc ?  ;)


-- 
  |    Sergio A. Kessler  http://sak.org.ar
-O_O-  You can have it Soon, Cheap, and Working; choose *two*.