| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Commit docbook2man? |
| Date: | 2001-09-03 23:17:10 |
| Message-ID: | 11881.999559030@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Since we're slowly nearing a release, I'm already starting to hack around
> the docbook2man stuff again. To produce acceptable results several
> patches are required against the upstream release, and I'd like to have
> those recorded somewhere, i.e., our CVS rep. That way we can get a few
> more people testing the man pages before release.
> Should I import the original first and then commit the patches afterwards,
> or should I import the patches as separate files, or is anyone keen about
> vendor branches?
How big is docbook2man? I'm unenthused about adding a large chunk of
code to our distribution that's just a copy of someone else's
distribution.
If it's only a few K of source then replicating it in our distro might
make sense ... else I'd vote for just putting the required patch diffs
into a README or some such file.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-09-03 23:35:22 | Re: doc for pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-09-03 21:20:41 | Re: Listing SQL books in the documentation |