Re: GSoC applicant proposal, Uday PB

From: Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>
To: Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "p(dot)b uday" <uday(dot)pb26(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GSoC applicant proposal, Uday PB
Date: 2020-03-19 19:20:59
Message-ID: a185b250-4e13-f854-c55a-8c1a84f51b11@anastigmatix.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3/19/20 2:03 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:

> Does your project imply any coding? AFAIR, GSoC doesn't allow pure
> documentation projects.

That's a good question. The idea as I proposed it is more of an
infrastructure project, adjusting the toolchain that currently
autogenerates the docs (along with some stylesheets/templates) so
that a more usable web reference is generated from the existing
documentation—and to make it capable of generating per-version
subtrees, as the PostgreSQL manual does, rather than having the
most recent release be the only online reference available.

I was not envisioning it as a technical-writing project to improve
the content of the documentation. That surely wouldn't hurt, but
isn't what I had in mind here.

I am open to withdrawing it and reposting as a Google Season of Docs
project if that's what the community prefers, only in that case
I wonder if it would end up attracting contributors who would be
expecting to do some writing and copy-editing, and end up intimidated
by the coding/infrastructure work required.

So I'm not certain how it should be categorized, or whether GSoC
rules should preclude it. Judgment call?

Regards,
-Chap

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2020-03-19 19:23:04 Re: [PATCH] pg_upgrade: report the reason for failing to open the cluster version file
Previous Message Julien Rouhaud 2020-03-19 19:12:47 Re: Collation versioning