I think it is a must-do, but some concerns of customer using convention and
legacy applications, scripts etc.

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 1:44 PM, 陶征霖 <[email protected]> wrote:

> Good idea, but need quite a lot of effort and may also affect custormer
> behavior. Should handle it carefully.
>
> 2016-07-13 9:54 GMT+08:00 Ivan Weng <[email protected]>:
>
> > Agree with this good idea. But as Paul said, there are maybe already many
> > users use greeenplum_path.sh or something else in their environment. So
> we
> > need to think about it.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ivan
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Paul Guo <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I've asked this before. Seems that affects some old users. I'm not sure
> > > about the details.
> > > I agree that we should change it to a better name in a release.
> > >
> > > 2016-07-13 9:25 GMT+08:00 Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]>:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Xiang Sheng <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > Agree . @xunzhang.
> > > > > However , some greenplum strings can be easily replaced , but there
> > are
> > > > too
> > > > > many in the code or comments.  Changing all of them costs too much
> > > > efforts.
> > > > >
> > > > > So changing the strings that users can see is enough.
> > > >
> > > > Huge +1 to this! Btw, is this something we may be able to tackle in
> our
> > > > next Apache release?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Roman.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Zhenglin
>

Reply via email to