On 7/1/21 4:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 01.07.21 22:22, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> >> On 7/1/21 3:39 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> On 01.07.21 16:47, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >>>> >>>> On 6/2/21 4:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>>>> Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: >>>>>> I'm inclined to agree with Alvaro that the messages are at best an >>>>>> oddity. Standard Unix practice is to be silent on success. >>>>> We've been steadily moving towards less chatter during builds. >>>>> I'd be good with dropping these messages in HEAD, but doing so >>>>> in the back branches might be inadvisable. >>> >>>> OK, I think on reflection new targets will be cleaner. What I >>>> suggest is >>>> the attached, applied to all branches, followed by removal of the four >>>> noise messages in just HEAD. >>> >>> This naming approach is a bit problematic. For example, we have >>> "install-bin" in src/backend/, which is specifically for only >>> installing binaries, not data files etc. (hence the name). Your >>> proposal would confuse this scheme. >>> >>> I think we should also take a step back here and consider: We had >>> "all", which wasn't "all" enough, then we had "world", now we have >>> "world-minus-a-bit", but it's still more than "all". It's like we are >>> trying to prove the continuum hypothesis here. >>> >>> I think we had consensus on the make variable approach, so I'm >>> confused why a different solution was committed and backpatched >>> without discussion. >> >> >> In fact the names and approach were suggested in my email of June 21st. > > AFAICT this thread contains no email from June 21st or thereabouts. > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/6a421136-d462-b043-a8eb-e75b2861f3df%40dunslane.net >
Apologies. June 2nd. One day American style dates will stop playing havoc with my head - it's only been 25 years or so. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
