Re: About a recently-added message

At Thu, 15 Feb 2024 09:22:23 +0530, shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> wrote in 
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 8:26 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 7:51 PM Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024, at 8:45 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > Now, I am less clear about whether to quote "logical" or not in the
> > > above message. Do you have any suggestions?
> > >
> > >
> > > The possible confusion comes from the fact that the sentence contains "must be"
> > > in the middle of a comparison expression. For pg_createsubscriber, we are using
> > >
> > >         publisher requires wal_level >= logical
> > >
> > > I suggest to use something like
> > >
> > >         slot synchronization requires wal_level >= logical
> > >
> >
> > This sounds like a better idea but shouldn't we directly use this in
> > 'errmsg' instead of a separate 'errhint'? Also, if change this, then
> > we should make a similar change for other messages in the same
> > function.
> 
> +1 on changing the msg(s) suggested way. Please find the patch for the
> same. It also removes double quotes around the variable names

Thanks for the discussion.

With a translator hat on, I would be happy if I could determine
whether a word requires translation with minimal background
information. In this case, a translator needs to know which values
wal_level can take. It's relatively easy in this case, but I'm not
sure if this is always the case. Therefore, I would be slightly
happier if "logical" were double-quoted.

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center