On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 02:07:09PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > At Mon, 10 Jul 2023 09:04:42 +0800, Japin Li <japi...@hotmail.com> wrote in >> Sorry for the late reply! I'm not sure. How can I know whether it is >> translatable?
Per the documentation: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/nls-programmer.html#NLS-GUIDELINES Now, if you want to look at the shape of the messages, you could also run something like a `make init-po` and look at the messages generated in a .pot file. > Honestly, I'm not sold on the idea that we need to exhaust ourselves > providing an exhaustive list of usable keywords for users here. I > believe that it is unlikely that these keywords will be used in > different combinations each time without looking at the > documentation. On top of that, consider "csvlog" as an example, -- it > doesn't work as expected if logging_collector is off. Although this is > documented, we don't give any warnings at startup. This seems like a > bigger issue than the unusable keywords. (I don't mean to suggest to > fix this, as usual.) > > In short, I think a simple message like '"xxx" cannot be used in this > build' should suffice for keywords defined but unusable, and we should > stick with "unknown" for the undefined ones. Which is roughly what the existing GUC_check_errdetail() does as well, but you indeed lose a bit of context because the option wanted is not built. I am not convinced that there is something to change here. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
