Re: [HACKERS] Help text for pg_basebackup -R - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Help text for pg_basebackup -R
Date
Msg-id 20387.1487348495@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Help text for pg_basebackup -R  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Help text for pg_basebackup -R
List pgsql-hackers
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvherre@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> I'm guessing if we backpatch something like that, it would cause issues for
>>> translations, right? So we should make it head only?

>> We've had the argument a number of times.  My stand is that many
>> translators are active in the older branches, so this update would be
>> caught there too; and even if not, an updated English message is better
>> than an outdated native-language message.

> That makes sense to me, at least, so +1, for my part.

Yeah, if the existing message text is actually wrong or misleading,
we should back-patch.  I'm not sure I would do that if it's just a
cosmetic improvement.  In this particular case, +1.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_recvlogical.c doesn't build with --disable-integer-datetimes
Next
From: Keith Fiske
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY