Re: Can extension build own SGML document?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Can extension build own SGML document?
Date: 2015-09-14 23:06:35
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQ1bX9MtCaOW-WPKh_zCRT5O8t1q7Jc-9hKsu2TC7zvcg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 6:01 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I think the only way upstream Postgres could offer this is as a way to
> build a separate "book", i.e. not a chapter/section within the main
> book. I think it would require huge complications in doc/src/sgml's
> Makefile. Not sure it's worthwhile.

I am not sure either, and as each project/developer have always
different requirements I am convinced that this is going to be
finished with enforced rules in Makefile rules for sure, so it is
really unclear what would be the potential benefit to have a
centralized facility. Take for example man pages, those should not be
installed in share/doc/extension/ which is the default path, but in
$(DESTDIR)$(mandir)/man1...
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2015-09-14 23:13:49 Re: WIP: Make timestamptz_out less slow.
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2015-09-14 22:59:19 Re: [PATCH] add --log-output to pg_ctl on Windows