Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Inheritance mention

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-documentation <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Inheritance mention
Date: 2009-04-13 17:21:46
Message-ID: 17838.1239643306@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Pre-7.1 might indeed be old enough to cut, but how much are we really
>> saving? Four sentences out of our current docs doesn't excite me ...

> But since there's a doc set per version, it would make sense to stop
> mentioning unsupported versions in the docs for supported versions,
> no?  Or is this a FAQ thing we're talking about?

The problem is what to tell people to read if they want to transition
from an unsupported version to a supported version.

If we really wanted to save some space, we could cut all the release
notes for pre-7.4 (soon pre-8.0) releases.  But somehow that doesn't
seem like a good idea.  What it would mainly accomplish is to make it
hard to find the old information when you wanted it.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Tim LandscheidtDate: 2009-04-14 14:33:58
Subject: Clarification of psql's "-c" output
Previous:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2009-04-13 16:47:32
Subject: Re: Inheritance mention

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group