From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: man pages for contrib programs |
Date: | 2012-04-04 19:29:50 |
Message-ID: | 1333567489-sup-8144@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of mié abr 04 15:53:20 -0300 2012:
> ... would be really nice to have. Especially pgbench and pg_upgrade for
> me, but it would be useful to have man pages for everything.
>
> Unfortunately, we can't just replace the sect1's in in Appendix F [0]
> with refentry's, because the content model of DocBook doesn't allow
> that. (You can't have a mixed sequence of sect1 and refentry, only one
> or the other.)
Hm, would it work to have something like
<sect1> &pgbench; </sect1> <refentry> &pgbench; </refentry>
so that we get both? Probably with some conditional to avoid duplicate
output in html/pdf. (Why isn't this a problem for the SPI pages or
dblink?)
> I think it would be useful to split this up into three sections:
>
> F.1. Extensions
> F.2. Client Applications
> F.3. Server Applications
>
> where the first looks like now and the other two contain the refentry
> pages.
+1, but is there something that would not fit in either category? Not
sure if we have a SGML page for init-scripts for instance.
If you're going to monkey around in this general, please also look at
the README. It should probably just go away.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2012-04-04 19:30:52 | Re: [PATCH] lock_timeout and common SIGALRM framework |
Previous Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2012-04-04 19:19:33 | Re: [PATCH] lock_timeout and common SIGALRM framework |