Re: BUG #13589: content error - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: BUG #13589: content error
Date
Msg-id 55F8B45F.2060201@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #13589: content error  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: BUG #13589: content error  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: BUG #13589: content error  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-bugs
On 8/26/15 3:55 AM, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> As mentioned upthread, constructive criticism in the form of a patch
>> might serve to move the discussion forward.
>
> Here is a patch showing around 45 suggested changes to get the ball
> rolling.  Mostly "he or she", but sometimes other wording, and in one
> case I took a few liberties and introduced <literal>name</> to stand
> in for database objects instead of pronouns which I hope doesn't read
> too clumsily or change the meaning.  I didn't cover the release notes.
>
> A big +1 from me for changing this (unintentionally) unwelcoming
> language generally, whatever the new wording.

(Reviewing this for the commit fest ...), I welcome this discussion and
am surprised that you have found so many issues.  But I'm not in favor
of this particular patch.  I think most people in the discussion were
not in favor of "he or she", and I feel in most of the cases where you
dropped the pronoun in favor of just "the", it loses clarity.

I would be mildly in favor of singular they, but it needs to be woven in
carefully.

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: David Gould
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #13620: Streaming replication process titles should use zero padding for TX ids.
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #13589: content error