On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Personally I think the naming decision is close enough to be a coin
> toss, and so either choice is fine with me. However, I think it is
> Clearly Unacceptable for createdb's switches to be spelled differently
> than the underlying SQL command's options. So it's not really "let's
> not change this" but "which one do you consider it more important to not
> change"?
In this case, createdb - however, this particular case is of very
minor impact to us. My gripe is more on the general issue of being
potentially forced to add support for a new version and beta test
tools in the same timeframe that PostgreSQL has for beta.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
