Re: Change wording for PG_MODULE_MAGIC inclusion

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Change wording for PG_MODULE_MAGIC inclusion
Date: 2017-08-31 04:56:39
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-docs

> On 31 Aug 2017, at 04:42, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 8/30/17 13:28, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 30 Aug 2017, at 16:51, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>>> Uh, why would anybody be reading the pg10 docs in order to compile
>>>> modules for 8.2? I vote to just drop the suggestion that there needs to
>>>> be an #ifdef guard altogether.
>>> +1 ... if you are reading the current docs, they're going to tell you
>>> lots of things that won't work in 8.1.
>> Patch updated with dropping the #ifdef guard paragraph. Also removed the
>> mention of when the magic block was introduced as it seemed an odd piece of
>> archaeology to keep around when the guard paragraph was removed.
> committed


cheers ./daniel

In response to

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2017-08-31 13:23:24 Re: Confusing Trigger Docs.
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-08-31 02:42:24 Re: Change wording for PG_MODULE_MAGIC inclusion