On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> So I think this is just an excuse for turning --no-security-labels >> into --no-object-property=security-label. To me, that's just plain >> worse. > > It does not seem that my thoughts here have been correctly transmitted > to your brain.
Dang, we really should have put more work into that inter-brain link. PostgreSQL group mind FTW! > I do not mean to change the user-facing options, just > to refactor the code internally so as --no-foo switches can be more > easily generated, added and handled as they are associated with an > object type. A portion of the complains is caused by the fact that a > lot of similar code is duplicated. Ah, well. No objection to refactoring away duplicate code, of course. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
