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

Re: Inheritance mention

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-documentation <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Inheritance mention
Date: 2009-04-13 16:47:32
Message-ID: dcc563d10904130947v39309a9ahab513bad19388dd3@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> writes:
>> Bruce Momjian escreveu:
>>> Do people feel we should continue documenting that Postgres pre-7.1
>>> didn't reference child tables by default?
>>>
>> No. IMHO we should remove references to unsupported releases from documentation.
>
> "Unsupported releases" is far too strict a criterion for this.  For
> example, there are demonstrably still people using 7.2 (we had a
> question about it just last week).  They will still appreciate these
> notes when they get around to updating.
>
> Pre-7.1 might indeed be old enough to cut, but how much are we really
> saving?  Four sentences out of our current docs doesn't excite me ...

But since there's a doc set per version, it would make sense to stop
mentioning unsupported versions in the docs for supported versions,
no?  Or is this a FAQ thing we're talking about?

In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-04-13 17:21:46
Subject: Re: Inheritance mention
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-04-13 06:04:18
Subject: Re: Inheritance mention

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