Re: FDW API / flow charts for the docs?

* Peter Eisentraut (peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net) wrote:
> In my mind, it's not worth the effort unless we have, say, at least a
> dozen really useful images to add. I don't want to go through this
> entire pain for one image on a pretty minor topic.

These are certainly fair issues- my point was merely that once we have
support for such in the regular docs, the actual migration from the wiki
into the docs would hopefully not be too difficult.

As to your point about not wanting to do it for a single image- it seems
we could potentially say that for every individual image proposed, but
if we don't keep track of those images anywhere then we may not realize
that 5 or 10 have actually been done and proposed but never integrated.
If they're kept on the wiki then perhaps we would both keep track of the
ones proposed and realize when it's worthwhile to add support for them
to the doc build system.

As to Tom's point on the previous thread, that we would need to actually
maintain these images, that is helped by using dia, imv, since it's a
pretty simple tool to use and understand and is available on many
platforms. There's still some risk there, of course, but it could be
worth it in the end. Images really can explain things in a much better
way in many cases.

Thanks,

Stephen