| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Quick Extensions Question |
| Date: | 2011-03-04 19:43:26 |
| Message-ID: | 23925.1299267806@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> requires_superuser isn't bad, but I think I'd rather avoid "requires"
>> here since we're also using that terminology for prerequisite
>> extensions. How about "must_be_superuser"?
> Sorry to continue painting in old fashioned colors, but if we're not
> going to reuse established terms from our glossary, then I'd better
> see us using just "superuser" here.
[ shrug... ] No objection here. Going once, going twice ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2011-03-04 20:04:48 | Re: Sync Rep v19 |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2011-03-04 19:26:28 | Re: Quick Extensions Question |