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

Re: CVS changes

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CVS changes
Date: 2001-10-01 20:10:50
Message-ID: 3BB8CDCA.1235F8A4@fourpalms.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-hackers
> > >> Not everyone has sgml tools on their local machine, do they?
> > > But everyone committing changes to docs does, or should have, sgml tools
> > > on *their* machines. Right??
> > I think it's a bad idea to create such a policy; anything we do that
> > raises the bar for docs contributions will just mean that we have less
> > and worse documentation.  Hasn't our past policy always been "submit
> > whatever you want, even plain text, and we'll fix the markup later"?

Certainly! I've never said otherwise, didn't suggest a change in policy,
and have always been committed to *doing* the markup to make the former
"submit anything" happen. If the docs are broken for a while, or if we
have to work on the submitted patches before committing them, then we
should do that.

But docs don't magically happen without someone babysitting them at
least a little; I know that from experience and I know that Peter and
others have done a lot of work to make this happen too.

Right now, folks are seeing that docs are not getting built, and are
heading off in several directions. I *thought* I've been paying
attention (but have been very busy so could have missed it) and I *know*
that lots of work is being done on the web site, things are being
rearranged etc etc but for those of us who are peripherally involved
with pieces of the web site it would be *really* helpful to know what is
planned, where things are going to go, when it might happen, etc etc.

I would like to resolve the 12 hour lag for CVSup and anoncvs service,
and frankly until that is resolved we should accept that we have a 12
hour turnaround on most changes. Coincidentally, that is the rate at
which the docs are (or would be, if I could figure out where they should
go) currently built.

Let's stop trying to each build a new wheel; we have plenty enough
already. There are fundamental breakages in the current servers, and
until those are resolve I'm not happy that we are changing web site info
etc to suggest workarounds as permanent solutions.

all imho of course ;)

                      - Thomas

In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2001-10-01 20:57:04
Subject: Re: CVS changes
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-10-01 19:41:33
Subject: Re: CVS changes

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2001-10-01 20:13:54
Subject: Re: Preparation for Beta
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-10-01 19:41:33
Subject: Re: CVS changes

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