| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(dot)fontaine(at)facebook(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Extensions Documentation |
| Date: | 2012-10-26 00:07:51 |
| Message-ID: | 1351210071.31132.8.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2012-10-25 at 10:31 -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> Any plans to implement a documentation standard for extensions? I would love to see `make install` create the necessary man pages and perhaps even HTML (with a link added in the proper place). Anyone given this any thought? Dim?
I think the emerging standard is to have a README.md (or something
similar). This gives enough structure and formatting options for most
extensions.
I don't think we need anything fancy to install and access the
documentation. Most of the time it's on a server, in which case "less"
would do a good job. To me, it's more important to have the
documentation easily accessible over the internet for reference during
development.
That said, we do have a built-in documentation infrastructure, which is
COMMENT. So an extension could have its documentation in its comment
and the comments on its subordinate objects. This may or may not
overlap with what a README would contain, but that depends on the
situation, I think.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2012-10-26 00:20:25 | Re: Extensions Documentation |
| Previous Message | Euler Taveira | 2012-10-25 23:16:38 | Re: sql_implementation_info still contains old value |