On Wednesday, August 28, 2024 12:11 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > Peter Smith mentioned to me off-list that the names of conflict > > > > types 'update_differ' and 'delete_differ' are not intuitive as > > > > compared to all other conflict types like insert_exists, > > > > update_missing, etc. The other alternative that comes to mind for > > > > those conflicts is to name them as > > 'update_origin_differ'/''delete_origin_differ'. > > > > > > > > > > For things to "differ" there must be more than one them. The plural > > > of origin is origins. > > > > > > e.g. 'update_origins_differ'/''delete_origins_differ'. > > > > > > OTOH, you could say "differs" instead of differ: > > > > > > e.g. 'update_origin_differs'/''delete_origin_differs'. > > > > > > > +1 on 'update_origin_differs' instead of 'update_origins_differ' as > > the former is somewhat similar to other conflict names 'insert_exists' > > and 'update_exists'. > > Since we reached a consensus on this, I am attaching a small patch to rename > as suggested.
Sorry, I attached the wrong patch. Here is correct one. Best Regards, Hou zj
0001-Rename-the-conflict-types-for-origin-differ-cases.patch
Description: 0001-Rename-the-conflict-types-for-origin-differ-cases.patch
