Re: CVS in docs

On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 16:10, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
> On 22 September 2010 15:07, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 15:46, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>>>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 00:38, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>>>> A quick grep suggests that there are a dozen or two other passing
>>>>> references to CVS in docs and comments, which'd be worth cleaning
>>>>> up in HEAD, but probably not worth back-patching.
>>>
>>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>>> What about the messages in configure?
>>>> "configure:*** Without Bison you will not be able to build PostgreSQL
>>>> from CVS nor"
>>>
>>> I was lumping those in the "not worth back-patching" category, but
>>> if you're excited about them, feel free to back-patch.
>>
>> Ok. I'll see - I need to get an old version of autoconf going too - I
>> somehow managed to wipe the one I have, and Ubuntu ships with a
>> different version :-)
>>
>> I take the lack of comment on the patch itself as silent approval, so
>> I'll go look at backporting it soon.
>
> I don't see any mention of redirecting the Heap-Only Tuples glossary
> reference link.  Is that staying as it is?

Ah, good point. No, let's change that.

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/