Re: proposal: alternative psql commands quit and exit - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
| From | Everaldo Canuto |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: proposal: alternative psql commands quit and exit |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | CACYgWUmiEyAUJL3PZZPVOMWVi4XWnM8amJGDESg3Kzsnx4=Wgg@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: proposal: alternative psql commands quit and exit (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>) |
| Responses |
Re: proposal: alternative psql commands quit and exit
|
| List | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 2:38 AM, Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net> wrote:
On 01/13/18 21:36, Everaldo Canuto wrote:
> I don't wanna be irritating but here every postgres user I found really
> can't understand how the original patch was not accepted, people against it
> did not show good reasons.
As I was watching this thread go by, the reasons being shown seemed good
to me, and they were being raised by some of the people most responsible
(as one quickly learns by scanning old archives), over the years, for
postgres being the excellent thing that it is, so it would not be my
first instinct to dismiss them.
Yes, your are right and I Postgres is the best database in my opinion and it tells me that community here must be responsible. I just think that Postgres could be a little more friendly, it is really hard to me to see my customers choosing other databases because they feel Postgres is hard, I end up loosing amazing Postgres features.
Unfortunately you are right, my first instinct was to dismiss them and it could be a problem on my side but as I said previously on this thread, it is really frustrating for me to see a so small patch that "fix" one of new comers problem (also casual users and user of multiple databases) and don't hurts anything in PG end up on a directions that makes the problem even worst. Also I don't see a consensus on this thread and I don't understand how decisions are taken.
Again, maybe the problem is with me but is a fact that people feel like Postgres is hard.
Since it is my last message to this thread (I don't think my words will convince anyone) let me explain how came here: I was attending a conference with a friend who is also the owner of a Postgres support company and we start to discuss some small problems that could be relatively easy to fix and could make Postgres even better. At some point he just point why a experienced C developer like me (we would love to develop in C) don't contribute to the project and we came up with a list of things to improve and I decide to make a test with something simple and fast to implement to test if Postgres is not like a GNOME community. So, here I am.
One of the things I have come to really appreciate about this community
(in which I am still a relative newcomer) is that when disagreements arise,
you can see them being worked through by consideration of technical points
and somewhat measurable principles. In that light, if there's a better
conclusion you think is worth advocating, that would fit right in if done
in ways that respond to, and address in some way, the points already
raised; that adds more to the conversation than just saying they were
not "good".
-Chap
You are right again and could be something wrong with my side, I really can't see the arguments agains as good, they look me like a personal taste and not technical. I through that even my arguments or people that agree with this patch is also more a personal opinion than technical but I think it will not hurt if we made Postgres more friendly to newcomers.
What is really funny is that I was prepared for long and hard discussions on future because but not on this. On my list of next patches was:
* SHOW TABLES
* DES[CRIBE]
* SEARCH path environment var for \i and \ir (it is really useful)
* Changes on pg_hba default values so local sql clients can connect without change it
* and so on...
* and so on...
Anyway, sorry if I offended someone, It is not my intention.
Keep the good work guys and even if PG is the best, maybe take some look at MariaDB will not hurt too much ;-)
Regards.
pgsql-hackers by date: