On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 09:30:27AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Fine by me as well. I guess I'll just apply that once v18 opens up.
And done with 00d819d46a6f.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024, at 10:42, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> I'll start a new separate thread about fixing the other non-canonical URLs.
Here is the separate thread to fix the docs to use canonical links:
https://postgr.es/m/8ccc96c7-0515-491b-be98-cfacdaeda...@app.fastmail.com
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, at 18:54, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 8:47 AM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 07:58:55AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 7:52 AM Joel Jacobson wrote:
>> >> Want me to fix that or will the committer handl
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 8:47 AM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 07:58:55AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 7:52 AM Joel Jacobson wrote:
> >> Want me to fix that or will the committer handle that?
> >>
> >> I found some more similar cases in acronyms.sg
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 07:58:55AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 7:52 AM Joel Jacobson wrote:
>> Want me to fix that or will the committer handle that?
>>
>> I found some more similar cases in acronyms.sgml.
>
> Given this I'd be OK with committing as-is in the name of
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 7:52 AM Joel Jacobson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, at 02:59, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > Though there was no comment on the fact we should be linking to:
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access-control_list
> >
> > not:
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, at 02:59, David G. Johnston wrote:
> Though there was no comment on the fact we should be linking to:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access-control_list
>
> not:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_Control_List
>
> to avoid the dis-ambiguation redirect.
>
> If we are m
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 05:59:01PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> Though there was no comment on the fact we should be linking to:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access-control_list
>
> not:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_Control_List
>
> to avoid the dis-ambiguation redirect.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 10:11 PM Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 12:20:20AM +0200, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> > Thanks, much better. New version attached.
>
> + The PostgreSQL documentation, and code,
> refers
> + to the specifications within the ACL as "privileges". This
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 5:30 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 11:55:03AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 08:10:24AM +0200, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024, at 07:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > >> v1 is fine without the "privileges list"
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 11:55:03AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 08:10:24AM +0200, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024, at 07:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> v1 is fine without the "privileges list" part mentioned by Nathan in
> >> the first reply.
> >
> > v2 is
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 08:10:24AM +0200, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024, at 07:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> v1 is fine without the "privileges list" part mentioned by Nathan in
>> the first reply.
>
> v2 is exactly that, but renamed and attached, so we have an entry this
> was the l
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024, at 07:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 12:20:20AM +0200, Joel Jacobson wrote:
>> Thanks, much better. New version attached.
>
> + The PostgreSQL documentation, and code,
> refers
> + to the specifications within the ACL as "privileges". This has
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 12:20:20AM +0200, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> Thanks, much better. New version attached.
+ The PostgreSQL documentation, and code, refers
+ to the specifications within the ACL as "privileges". This has the same
+ meaning as "permissions" on the linked page. Gen
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, at 23:15, David G. Johnston wrote:
> I really dislike "For avoidance of doubt and clarity" - and in terms of
> being equivalent the following seems like a more accurate description
> of reality.
>
> The PostgreSQL documentation, and code, refers to the specifications
> with
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 1:49 PM Joel Jacobson wrote:
> How about?
>
> +
> + The linked page uses "permissions" while we consistently use the
> synonym
> + "privileges", to describe the contents of the list. For avoidance of
> + doubt and clarity, these two terms are equivalent
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, at 21:51, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 12:46 PM Joel Jacobson wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, at 18:02, David G. Johnston wrote:
>>
>> > The page we link to uses "permissions" while we consistently use
>> > "privileges" to describe the contents of the
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 12:46 PM Joel Jacobson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, at 18:02, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
> > The page we link to uses "permissions" while we consistently use
> > "privileges" to describe the contents of the list. This seems like an
> > obvious synonym, but as the point
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, at 18:02, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 8:44 AM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
>> I think we could omit "i.e. privileges list."
>>
>
> Agreed. Between the docs and code we say "privileges list" once and
> that refers to the dumputIls description of the argum
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 8:44 AM Nathan Bossart
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 02:32:27PM +0200, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> > This patch is based on a suggestion from a separate thread [1]:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, at 01:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> Rather unrelated to this patch, still this
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 02:32:27PM +0200, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> This patch is based on a suggestion from a separate thread [1]:
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, at 01:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Rather unrelated to this patch, still this patch makes the situation
>> more complicated in the docs, but w
Hello hackers,
This patch is based on a suggestion from a separate thread [1]:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024, at 01:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Rather unrelated to this patch, still this patch makes the situation
> more complicated in the docs, but wouldn't it be better to add ACL as
> a term in acronyms
22 matches
Mail list logo
