Re: bad examples in pg_dump README

On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 19:55 -0700, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2013-01-05 at 15:34 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:36 AM, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> > I propose slimming down the pg_dump README, keeping intact the
> >> > introductory notes and details of the tar format.
> >>
> >> Do we need to keep it at all, really? Certainly the introductory part
> >> is covered in the main documentation already...
> >
> > I'd remove it and distribute the remaining information, if any, between
> > the source code and the man page.
>
> Here's a patch to do so. After removing the discussed bogus
> information, there were only two notes which I still found relevant,
> so I stuck those in the appropriate header comments.

Committed.