Sounds reasonable, but why exactly did we spell out "english" instead of "en" ?
Seems the abbrev is much easier to extract from LANG or browser prefs ...
Andreas
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] Im Auftrag von Tom Lane
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. August 2007 17:11
An: Oleg Bartunov; Teodor Sigaev
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Betreff: [HACKERS] Naming of the prefab snowball stemmer dictionaries [bayes][heur]
Wichtigkeit: Niedrig
I notice that the existing tsearch documentation that we've imported fairly consistently refers to Snowball
dictionarieswith names like "en_stem", "ru_stem", etc. However, CVS HEAD is set up to create them with names
"english","russian", etc. As I've been absorbing more of the docs I'm starting to wonder whether this is a good idea.
ISTMthat these names encourage a novice to think that the one dictionary is all you could need for a given language;
andthere are enough examples of more-complex setups in the docs to make it clear that in fact Snowball is not the
be-alland end-all of dictionaries.
I'm thinking that going back to the old naming convention (or something like it --- maybe "english_stem",
"russian_stem",etc) would be better.
It'd help to give the right impression, namely that these dictionaries are a component of a solution but not
necessarilyall you need.
Thoughts?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
