Satoshi Nagayasu wrote:
> On 2010/07/29 17:41, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > I had a short look at the docs Satoshi-san put online and yes, I'm impressed.
> > However, I won't be able to proof read them before September. But given that
> > 9.1 development is just starting I see no problem in putting the docs into the
> > archive be it cvs or git and improve if there if it really needs improvement.
> > In my short check I didn't see anything major that needed to be changed. This
> > of course implies that the new docs are available in a suitable format.
> Thank you all for your attention to the ecpg document work.
> Yes, I see some developers are too busy, so it's difficult to take time
> to review such large amount of changes of the doc for now.
> I'm thinking about taking a few weeks after August or September
> to review and merge the document intensively (like CommitFest)
> by some developers who are interested in this doc.
> I know this change is very huge, and it's very difficult to review
> and give feedback through the whole document. So I think we sould take
> an approach to review and merge chapter by chapter during the period,
> and it can be an effective way to merge this large change
> if we can take time for such intensive work.
> Is this possible? Any suggestions?
I would like to help too.
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
In response to
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: Thom Brown||Date: 2010-08-12 19:49:59|
|Subject: Confusing example context|
|Previous:||From: Satoshi Nagayasu||Date: 2010-08-12 00:51:18|
|Subject: Re: ECPG - Some errno definitions don't match to the manual|
pgsql-interfaces by date
|Next:||From: Bosco Rama||Date: 2010-08-26 00:02:00|
|Subject: Re: Large object support in ecpg|
|Previous:||From: Bosco Rama||Date: 2010-08-05 22:17:28|
|Subject: Large object support in ecpg|