On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On ons, 2009-11-25 at 22:15 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 22:07, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> > On ons, 2009-11-25 at 16:27 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> >> Attached is a patch which adds a chapter to git in our documentation,
>> >> around where we have several chapters about cvs today. It also removes
>> >> a few very out of date comments about cvs
>> > I think this whole chapter could be removed and the relevant information
>> > added to the web site or the wiki.
>> > (Btw., it's spelled Git, not GIT.)
>> Completely, or replaced with a reference to pages on the web/wiki?
> I think the appendix in question could be removed completely, if the
> content is adequately covered elsewhere.
> In the installation instructions chapter, there is a section "Getting
> the Source", which could warrant a link or reference to the appropriate
> instructions on the web site.
I have to say I'm not really impressed by the idea of removing things
from our documentation and replacing them with pages on the wiki. The
documentation is better-written and easier to navigate. Yeah, the
part about 28K modems is pretty silly, but we can fix that without
throwing the baby out with the bathwater...
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2009-11-26 11:44:19|
|Subject: Re: cvs chapters in our docs|
|Previous:||From: Jeff Davis||Date: 2009-11-26 09:33:49|
|Subject: Re: operator exclusion constraints|