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

Re: Documentation in book length

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>,Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "" <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Documentation in book length
Date: 2003-01-03 01:00:04
Message-ID: 20030102205943.U40620@hub.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Lamar Owen wrote:

> On Thursday 02 January 2003 18:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> > BTW, the Red Hat RHDB group has spent a fair amount of time rethinking
> > the overall organization of the docs and trying to organize 'em in a
> > more logical order.  They'd like to contribute that work back so they
> > don't have to maintain a variant version of the docs.  Is this a good
> > time to think about looking over what they've done?
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/rhdb/
>
> See the links on the left under 'RHDB 2.1 Documentation'.
>
> They are quite good.

they look like our docs ... what is different?


In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2003-01-03 01:03:28
Subject: Re: Documentation in book length
Previous:From: Lamar OwenDate: 2003-01-02 23:41:23
Subject: Re: Documentation in book length

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