Re: template0 database comment

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: template0 database comment
Date: 2011-03-14 15:32:35
Message-ID: 9540.1300116755@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, I think that the right way to approach this is to have initdb
>> comment *both* of those databases. I don't like that specific wording
>> for template0 though. Maybe
>>
>> template0: unmodified copy of original template1 database
>> template1: default template for new databases

> Tom, the current comment for "template1" is "default template database".
> Do you like your above wording better? It does make it slighly longer.

Actually that's Greg's wording. Yeah I do like it better. If you don't
already know what a template database is, "template1: default template
database" is going to convey precisely nothing to you. Greg's version
at least gives you the information that it has got something to do with
making new databases, which would probably be enough to prompt people to
go look in the right part of the docs.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Devrim GÜNDÜZ 2011-03-14 15:33:03 Re: GSoC 2011 - Mentors? Projects?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2011-03-14 15:27:03 Re: template0 database comment