| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "" <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Documentation in book length |
| Date: | 2003-01-03 01:00:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20030102205943.U40620@hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Thursday 02 January 2003 18:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> > BTW, the Red Hat RHDB group has spent a fair amount of time rethinking
> > the overall organization of the docs and trying to organize 'em in a
> > more logical order. They'd like to contribute that work back so they
> > don't have to maintain a variant version of the docs. Is this a good
> > time to think about looking over what they've done?
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/rhdb/
>
> See the links on the left under 'RHDB 2.1 Documentation'.
>
> They are quite good.
they look like our docs ... what is different?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2003-01-03 01:03:28 | Re: Documentation in book length |
| Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2003-01-02 23:41:23 | Re: Documentation in book length |