| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Can extension build own SGML document? |
| Date: | 2015-10-14 17:56:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20151014175628.GE4405@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Christopher Browne wrote:
> There would be some merit to some remapping to transform "creaky old
> DocBook 4.2" (what we're using) to a newer version, perhaps biased towards
> XML, and have our toolset merge the bits into a big XML (in DocBook 5,
> presumably) file for processing using more modern DocBook tools.
As I recall, last time we discussed this, we found that the process for
XML docbook took 10 times longer to produce the output files. The XML
toolchain was just too young at the time. It would be nice to know
whether it has aged well, i.e. has the runtime to build our docs
improved?
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amir Rohan | 2015-10-14 17:59:54 | Re: Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files |
| Previous Message | Shay Rojansky | 2015-10-14 17:52:36 | Re: Allow ssl_renegotiation_limit in PG 9.5 |