Brook Milligan wrote:
>
> > I hope we don't have a consensus on this. Long commands with
> > underscores in them are certainly another sign of the coming
> > apocalypse ;)
>
> But if we keep symlinks to the existing names, is that OK?
>
> Isn't the point to avoid naming conflicts. Symlinks won't help that,
> surely.
my suggestion was:
in 7.0: provide symlinks for backward compatibility and make big
warnings 'don't use createuser, etc. they are deprecated'
all over the place ...
in 7.1: remove the symlinks.
> I agree; underscores are a pain. If you must go this direction, I
> suggest hyphens (-).
yup, but maybe (-) can rise problems in some filesystems ...
(I certainly don't know)
and more importantly you have then to rename pg_dump and pg_dumpall
wich is the more heavily used command in scripts ...
my idea was to leave this commands untouched.
as for longnames that Thomas doesn't like (wich I don't agree because
my idea for upgrading scripts is just: 'prepend a pg_ to the commands')
what about pg_adduser, pg_deluser, pg_adddb, etc ? ;)
-- | Sergio A. Kessler http://sak.org.ar
-O_O- You can have it Soon, Cheap, and Working; choose *two*.
