From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsqlrpms-hackers(at)pgfoundry(dot)org |
Cc: | Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andre Truter <linux(at)trusoft(dot)co(dot)za> |
Subject: | Re: [Pgsqlrpms-hackers] Re: DBlink documentation |
Date: | 2005-12-17 20:17:50 |
Message-ID: | 43A4726E.6050700@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Actually, I don't think you can reasonably blame the Debian packager
> for having overlooked the fact that contrib/dblink has more
> documentation files besides its README. The PGDG RPM people overlooked
> that too, as did Red Hat (ie, me).
Well, in my own defense, I pointed out the change explicitly when I
submitted the patch (which was over 3 years ago now, prior to 7.3 beta
feature freeze), and no one objected back then:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2002-08/msg00640.php
> While we (the packagers) could fix this now that our attention has been
> called to it, I wonder whether the better plan wouldn't be to insist
> that dblink and tsearch2 fall into line with the rest of the contrib
> modules. At the very least we need a uniform convention for docs files
> so that packagers won't be playing catchup forever.
I'm happy to lump all the docs back into the README if that's what you
want, but I split it up in the first place because it was getting very long.
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-17 20:47:54 | Re: [Pgsqlrpms-hackers] Re: DBlink documentation |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-17 18:31:08 | Re: DBlink documentation |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-17 20:47:54 | Re: [Pgsqlrpms-hackers] Re: DBlink documentation |
Previous Message | Mag Gam | 2005-12-17 19:16:50 | Tsearch2 and aspell |