"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (side note - maybe we need a check target for these that uses a temp install
> - that would make it easier to check for errors like this).
IIRC, the reason we don't have that is that it's too hard to get it to
work reliably (shared library search path
Neil Conway said:
> On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 22:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There are one or two "cannot"s that should be "could not"s in your hit
>> list, per the style guidelines.
>>
>> While you're at it -- I noticed several of the tsearch2 messages refer
>> to "lexem(s)". The word is "lexeme", t
On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 22:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> There are one or two "cannot"s that should be "could not"s in your
> hit list, per the style guidelines.
>
> While you're at it -- I noticed several of the tsearch2 messages refer
> to "lexem(s)". The word is "lexeme", the plural "lexemes", so
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Attached is a patch that makes the message strings used in elogs and
> ereports more consistent with the style guidelines:
There are one or two "cannot"s that should be "could not"s in your
hit list, per the style guidelines.
While you're at it -- I notic
Attached is a patch that makes the message strings used in elogs and
ereports more consistent with the style guidelines: errdetail should
begin with a capital letter and end with a period, whereas errmsg should
not. Most of the corrections are for contrib/, although the patch also
fixes a few mista
