Sounds reasonable, but why exactly did we spell out "english" instead of "en" ? Seems the abbrev is much easier to extract from LANG or browser prefs ...
Andreas -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Tom Lane Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. August 2007 17:11 An: Oleg Bartunov; Teodor Sigaev Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org Betreff: [HACKERS] Naming of the prefab snowball stemmer dictionaries [bayes][heur] Wichtigkeit: Niedrig I notice that the existing tsearch documentation that we've imported fairly consistently refers to Snowball dictionaries with names like "en_stem", "ru_stem", etc. However, CVS HEAD is set up to create them with names "english", "russian", etc. As I've been absorbing more of the docs I'm starting to wonder whether this is a good idea. ISTM that these names encourage a novice to think that the one dictionary is all you could need for a given language; and there are enough examples of more-complex setups in the docs to make it clear that in fact Snowball is not the be-all and end-all of dictionaries. I'm thinking that going back to the old naming convention (or something like it --- maybe "english_stem", "russian_stem", etc) would be better. It'd help to give the right impression, namely that these dictionaries are a component of a solution but not necessarily all you need. Thoughts? regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
