On 7/1/21 4:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 01.07.21 22:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>> On 7/1/21 3:39 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> On 01.07.21 16:47, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 6/2/21 4:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>>> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>>>>>> I'm inclined to agree with Alvaro that the messages are at best an
>>>>>> oddity. Standard Unix practice is to be silent on success.
>>>>> We've been steadily moving towards less chatter during builds.
>>>>> I'd be good with dropping these messages in HEAD, but doing so
>>>>> in the back branches might be inadvisable.
>>>
>>>> OK, I think on reflection new targets will be cleaner. What I
>>>> suggest is
>>>> the attached, applied to all branches, followed by removal of the four
>>>> noise messages in just HEAD.
>>>
>>> This naming approach is a bit problematic. For example, we have
>>> "install-bin" in src/backend/, which is specifically for only
>>> installing binaries, not data files etc. (hence the name). Your
>>> proposal would confuse this scheme.
>>>
>>> I think we should also take a step back here and consider: We had
>>> "all", which wasn't "all" enough, then we had "world", now we have
>>> "world-minus-a-bit", but it's still more than "all". It's like we are
>>> trying to prove the continuum hypothesis here.
>>>
>>> I think we had consensus on the make variable approach, so I'm
>>> confused why a different solution was committed and backpatched
>>> without discussion.
>>
>>
>> In fact the names and approach were suggested in my email of June 21st.
>
> AFAICT this thread contains no email from June 21st or thereabouts.
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/6a421136-d462-b043-a8eb-e75b2861f3df%40dunslane.net
>
Apologies. June 2nd. One day American style dates will stop playing
havoc with my head - it's only been 25 years or so.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
