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

Re: Docs refreshed

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Docs refreshed
Date: 2000-04-02 21:50:41
Message-ID: 38E7C0B1.B64B5CF1@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> It's really pretty silly to have tar.gz files in the CVS tree.  I can
> imagine what the underlying diff looks like every time they are updated
> :-(.  And, since they are ultimately just derived files, I agree with
> Peter that they shouldn't be in CVS at all.

Well, it wasn't pretty silly when I first did it, so have a little
sense of history please ;)

It was only the last year or so that the docs could get built on
hub.org (the postgresql.org host). It still breaks occasionally if
scrappy tries updating his machine, since the tools are only used by
me so he wouldn't notice if something goes wrong.

Previously, the docs had to be built on my machine at home, then
downloaded (and home is still where all package development and
debugging takes place). If they were to be recoverable *on* hub.org,
they had to go into cvs. It may be that we could now generate them
from scratch during the release tarball build, (it takes, maybe, 10-15
minutes to build all variations). But I would think you wouldn't want
to do that, but would rather pick them up from a known location. cvs
is where we do that now, but it could be from somewhere else I
suppose. Perhaps our build script for the tarball could include a
"wget" from a known location on postgresql.org?

Vince is planning on redoing the web site a bit to decouple the
release docs from the development docs. I'd like to have a "get the
docs" page which gives us the release docs for each release and the
current development docs, and we could have the tarball builder get
the release docs for the upcoming release from there.

Is this something for v7.1, or is there something important about this
now??

                    - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart				lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
South Pasadena, California

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-04-02 21:51:00
Subject: Re: Call for porting reports
Previous:From: Benjamin AdidaDate: 2000-04-02 21:47:25
Subject: Re: 7.0 release notes should call out incompatiblechanges more clearly

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