On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 16:03, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 12:23:48PM +0900, Ian Barwick wrote: > > > I would hope to find correct documentation somewhere--that somewhere > > > should be Postgresql's own documentation. > > > > Indeed, however it's important that the PostgreSQL documentation remains > > stable for released versions. > > > > As-is, the current patch set would result in the term "default role(s)" > > disappearing from the documentation in the next minor release, which is > > bound to cause confusion for anyone searching the documentation for the > > term they're familiar with (unless they happen to be reading this thread > > or following the git commit log). Cue cries of "OMG Postgres removed a > > feature in a minor release!!!?!!". > > > > And as Stephen mentions, it will break a lot of secondary documentation - > > not just blogs but things like internal training materials etc. > > > > If this change is made (which I'm personally not against), then it > should be > > only from PostgreSQL 13. For 9.6 ~ 12, IMHO it would be better to tweak > the > > existing documentation to somehow mention that "default roles" should be > > thought of as "prefined roles", and note they will be called this from > Pg13. > > Usually when I apply "wording" doc patches to head only, someone > complains that it should be backpatched, so I did that in this case. If > we want to change that idea, we need to agree on the criteria. > True, but it's not a wording patch, you're entirely renaming a feature. I agree with the change of default to predefined, but it shouldn't be backpatched. There should be a comment in there that it was previously known as "default roles", with indexed terms for both. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ <http://www.2ndquadrant.com/> PostgreSQL Solutions for the Enterprise
