From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
        Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
        "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>,
        "Ing. Marijo Kristo" <marijo.kristo@icloud.com>,
        PostgreSQL Bug List <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Revoke Connect Privilege from Database not working
In-reply-to: <abn22fc7-oHGObbZ@nathan>
References: 
 <CAKFQuwa7m2smqqpgPetw=i8Aj-xqg9Zjc5Z2aX3AUwNh96WnXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <d9bf666c-4d11-4196-99a8-b71d01d9ad40@me.com>
 <CAKFQuwbB-ZKtN_p_y5sWa2MrTuy5=pRNPWSj1Ud4HHvTuhb54w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3467676.1744041977@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAKFQuwbpC5w6sUq8gZQATrviZUT4bYpxW+=2uH6sWWMg7fWjzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <aRYLkTpazxKhnS_w@nathan> <1933586.1768950341@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <aXDwtbXCu42Fdmrn@nathan> <2222571.1769014621@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <aatOzgie9RlzbGoo@nathan> <abn22fc7-oHGObbZ@nathan>
Comments: In-reply-to Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 17 Mar 2026 19:50:33 -0500"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <770632.1773851777.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 12:36:17 -0400
Message-ID: <770633.1773851777@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/770633.1773851777%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes:
> I went ahead and tried adding docs, tests, and a commit message.

Thanks!  I was about to conclude that "silence means assent" and
do that work, but you beat me to it.  Your changes look fine,
except that where you have

+   ... A role can only attribute a grant
+   to another role if they possess the privileges of that role.

the word "possess" seems a little ambiguous --- it's not clear whether
it means SET or INHERIT privileges.  The grammar nerd in me doesn't
like "they" either.  How about s/they possess/it inherits/ ?
(likewise in revoke.sgml)

> The
> documentation for these commands might need a revamp.  They seem to meander
> a bit, probably due to decades of organic development.  But that's probably
> not this patch's problem.

Agreed, seems like a task for another day.

			regards, tom lane