| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Figures in docs |
| Date: | 2016-02-18 02:15:56 |
| Message-ID: | 56C5295C.6020904@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/17/16 8:23 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Do we really need git history for each figure? It seems we are waiting
> for a solution which will never realize.
What we need is tooling around a new file format that is similar or
analogous to our existing tooling, so that it is easy to edit, easy to
review, easy to build, easy to test, and so on. Otherwise, the image
files will not get maintained properly.
As an example, if an image contains text (e.g., a flow chart or
architecture diagram), then I expect that git grep will find it there,
so that I know to update it when I rename or augment something.
The above is all solvable. There are certainly image formats that fit
those descriptions.
Personally, I'd want to know specifically what images people would want,
so we could discuss or prototype something around that.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-02-18 02:19:08 | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-02-18 02:08:51 | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |