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

Placement of contrib modules in SGML documentation

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-docs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Placement of contrib modules in SGML documentation
Date: 2007-11-11 04:36:56
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-docs
I am still desperately unhappy with the choice to put the contrib docs
where they were put.  They are by no stretch of the imagination part of
the "SQL Language", and there is no defense for having inserted them
into the middle of the part, in front of substantially more widely
interesting information such as concurrency control.

Furthermore, labeling them "Standard Modules" is somebody's flight of
wishful thinking --- if they were installed by default, they'd deserve
such a title, but that's not happening any time soon.

I think there's a case for putting these pages under Part V Server
Programming (though a few are not in fact server-side code), or under
Part VI Reference (ignoring the fact that most of the text isn't in a
uniform reference-page style ... though maybe we could plan to work
towards that) or under Appendixes (though I'm sure there are people
who will complain about that because their private agenda is to make
these things as prominent as possible).  Or we could make them a new
top-level Part, probably just after Reference.

As for the title, how about "Available Add-On Modules", or something
like that?

BTW, why are neither contrib/dblink nor contrib/spi included in the

			regards, tom lane


pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-11-11 04:42:10
Subject: Re: Placement of contrib modules in SGML documentation
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-11-10 23:36:47
Subject: Re: Contrib docs v1

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group