I think it would be more confusing since there are two files and environment variables have same purpose. I think it is worth to investigate the impact from code and user and to replace greenplum.
Jiali On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Lili Ma <[email protected]> wrote: > For the command line tools name, what about we keep greenplum_path.sh and > add a hawq_env.sh and inside hawq_env.sh, we call greenplum_path.sh. So the > already user won't need to change their behavior, and new user can directly > use the new hawq named script? > > For the environment variable, for example GPHOME，can we create a new > variable HAWQHOME, and set it the same value as GPHOME? > > > Thanks > Lili > > 2016-07-13 13:55 GMT+08:00 Yi Jin <[email protected]>: > > > 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 > > > > > >
