On Wed, Sep 25, 2019, 00:52 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > On 2019-09-23 13:08, Alexander Lakhin wrote: > >> While translating Release Notes for version 12 I found some > >> inconsistencies with contributor names. > > > We had discussed this in previous years and resolved that we use the > > forms that these individuals use when posting to these mailing lists, in > > whichever order they prefer. So as far as I'm concerned, the forms > > listed in the release notes for PG10 and PG11 are canonical and should > > continue to be used. > > I have no strong feelings either way, so feel free to undo whatever > you think should be undone. > > I have noted that many of our Japanese contributors show a different name > order in their From: line than in their signature/footer, so it's not > entirely clear which preference they're expressing. >
I would say use the one in the signature in those cases. My guess would be that that part is under control of the individual, but the from field is in control of the HR department or whomever controls the name order in the catalogs of their big company. It's fairly common here, for example, to have "lastname, first" in the from, but nobody would use that in a scenario like this. The reason typically being wanting "phone book sorting" in the company wide address book, which does sort on lastname. As an employee people can typically control the name order in their signature, but not the address book. The situation in Asia may of course be very different, as it often is, but I think the general rule of who controls the order where still applies. /Magnus
