Re: Get rid of "Section.N.N.N" on DOCs

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Get rid of "Section.N.N.N" on DOCs
Date: 2025-12-19 19:10:56
Message-ID: CAKFQuwY3sXUnj_+t-OgycOY-OAuR=n91jy+Y1rwu8vd2nagtbw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 19, 2025 at 11:56 AM Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br> wrote:

> Em seg., 15 de dez. de 2025 às 09:19, Laurenz Albe <
> laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> escreveu:
>
>> Apart from the effort of the change, there is also the increased effort of
>> backpatching documentation changes, and those efforts have to be
>> outbalanced
>> by the benefits.
>>
>
> Are you sure we need to backpatch all these changes ?
> I'm not talking about the job I'll have but the job the committer will
> have.
> There are almost 300 different section numbers and more than 700 places
> will be changed,
> so will be 700 multiplied by how many versions of it. Are you sure ?
>
> I changed 8 or 10 just for testing and sending two as an example, just to
> see if it's worthwhile.
> Environment Variables need to change source and target, 30 places.
> String constants just source part, easy to change but harder to verify all
> related parts.
>
>
These changes aren't going to be back-patched. The concern stated is that
given all the places being touched, the odds of future back-patches hitting
one of them and resulting in a conflict has increased substantially.

David J.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2025-12-19 20:02:12 Re: [PATCH] pg_bsd_indent: improve formatting of multiline comments
Previous Message Marcos Pegoraro 2025-12-19 18:56:04 Re: Get rid of "Section.N.N.N" on DOCs