Thank you for comments.

I think LILI's suggestion is like a workaround or a temporary version which
is not that neat.

>From user's perspective, we should list all usage changes for them if we
rename, then have a further discussion/decision. Also, I think they should
be evolving too. Take a little effect to have great upgrade is worthy. Of
course, we should give them a buffer to transfer.

Best
xunzhang

2016-07-13 14:01 GMT+08:00 Lili Ma <[email protected]>:

> 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
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to