Tom Lane wrote:
> Phil Thompson <phil(at)river-bank(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > I've misunderstood the protocol - and the protocol specification is
> > therefore wrong (or at least incomplete) in this respect. Do you want
> > to fix the spec and include your enhancements or shall I?
> Yes, there are some things I thought were wrong in the programmer's guide
> chapter about the FE/BE protocol. I'd be happy to submit revised text.
> I haven't paid any attention yet to how the documentation is handled.
> Is the stuff in the distribution under doc/src/sgml considered the
> editable master text, or is it generated from some other format?
Yes, doc/src/sgml/*.sgml is the editable format. Phil's writeup is in
protocol.sgml and that is all that would need to be touched. Then submit
the patches (or a replacement file since you are the only one editing
that at the moment) and we'll snarf them up and merge.
The SGML markup is not the prettiest, but don't be intimidated/annoyed
by it. Especially if you are making incremental changes, I would guess
that you will see how to cut and paste using the existing markup tags in
the file. Let us know if you have any trouble with it. We can fix markup
problems after you post changes too...
> Do I need to subscribe to pgsql-docs to find out what to do? :-)
Only if you want to keep writing :)
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: David Gould||Date: 1998-05-01 03:53:45|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] CVSup help??|
|Previous:||From: Thomas G. Lockhart||Date: 1998-05-01 01:35:36|
|Subject: Re: CODE ANALYSIS FOR (an apparent error in answer from "##" (closest proximity)operator)|
pgsql-interfaces by date
|Next:||From: Stephen Davies||Date: 1998-05-01 05:09:21|
|Subject: ODBC: dates (again) and passthrough|
|Previous:||From: Tom Ivar Helbekkmo||Date: 1998-04-30 21:01:57|
|Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Access'97 and ODBC|