Re: Re: documentation is now XML

From: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: documentation is now XML
Date: 2017-12-02 18:10:00
Message-ID: 9968e070-ddf9-8002-713a-af67ab1012b3@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello,

28.11.2017 20:06, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 11/23/17 15:39, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I think we should have a discussion about whether it'd be smart
>>> to convert the back branches' documentation to XML as well.
>> My short answer to that is, I don't have time for that. I don't know if
>> anyone else wants to investigate it. But it took us years to get to
>> this point, and backpatching and back-testing all of that is just a lot
>> of work that was not planned.
> I thought that might be your answer :-(. I can't argue with it ---
> if it's not a simple thing to back-patch, then it's unclear whether
> the net annoyance over the next five years would be enough to justify
> doing the work.
I can prepare such patches (scripts to generate them). In fact we
(Postgres Pro) perform such conversion (SGML->XML) on-fly when building
docs starting from 9.6. So it's not problem to convert *.sgml and
replace Makefile and *.xsl.
But I would prefer to perform the conversion when we finish the move on
11devel (renaming sgml to xml, maybe optimizing xsl's...).

Best regards,
------
Alexander Lakhin
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message konstantin knizhnik 2017-12-02 20:24:17 Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2017-12-02 16:17:37 Re: Transform for pl/perl