Thread: Use of term hostaddrs for multiple hostaddr values
Hi all, While looking at the documentation of libpq, I have noticed that the term hostaddrs is used to qualify multiple values of hostaddr. This looks incorrect to me, as this is not the name of a connection parameter. Please find attached a patch to address this inconsistency. One error message is also touched, impacting translability. Thanks, -- Michael
Attachment
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:34 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
-- Hi all,
While looking at the documentation of libpq, I have noticed that the
term hostaddrs is used to qualify multiple values of hostaddr. This
looks incorrect to me, as this is not the name of a connection
parameter. Please find attached a patch to address this
inconsistency. One error message is also touched, impacting
translability.
These are both clear bugs, and the docs one should definitely be both applied and backpatched.
How much do we care about the error message when it comes to backpatching? Maybe we should leave that one to 11 only, to avoid breaking that, as the way it's written it's actually less wrong there.
Thoughts?
On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:30:43PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:34 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> > wrote: > These are both clear bugs, and the docs one should definitely be both > applied and backpatched. > > How much do we care about the error message when it comes to backpatching? > Maybe we should leave that one to 11 only, to avoid breaking that, as the > way it's written it's actually less wrong there. > > Thoughts? Thanks for your input! Applying the error message portion only on HEAD is a good plan, there is no point to make the life of translaters unnecessary painful. -- Michael
Attachment
On 1/20/18 17:39, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:30:43PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:34 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> These are both clear bugs, and the docs one should definitely be both >> applied and backpatched. >> >> How much do we care about the error message when it comes to backpatching? >> Maybe we should leave that one to 11 only, to avoid breaking that, as the >> way it's written it's actually less wrong there. >> >> Thoughts? > > Thanks for your input! > > Applying the error message portion only on HEAD is a good plan, there is > no point to make the life of translaters unnecessary painful. I would backpatch both. The updated error message is arguably easier to translate. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 12:45 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 1/20/18 17:39, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:30:43PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:34 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> These are both clear bugs, and the docs one should definitely be both
>> applied and backpatched.
>>
>> How much do we care about the error message when it comes to backpatching?
>> Maybe we should leave that one to 11 only, to avoid breaking that, as the
>> way it's written it's actually less wrong there.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks for your input!
>
> Applying the error message portion only on HEAD is a good plan, there is
> no point to make the life of translaters unnecessary painful.
I would backpatch both. The updated error message is arguably easier to
translate.
Fair enough. And since you do the translation merging at least, I'll go with that.
Thus, applied and backpatched to 10.
Thanks!
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 02:44:43PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Fair enough. And since you do the translation merging at least, I'll go > with that. > > Thus, applied and backpatched to 10. > > Thanks! OK, thanks all! -- Michael
Attachment
I have gone through the comments, both look straight forward to go
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:22:01PM +0000, Vasundhar Boddapati wrote: > I have gone through the comments, both look straight forward to go Thanks for the input. Please note that this has been pushed already as the following commit: commit: 5c15a54e851ecdd2b53e6d6a84f8ec0802ffc3cb author: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 13:41:52 +0100 Fix wording of "hostaddrs" -- Michael