Re: documentation is now XML

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:16:23PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Tuesday, January 23, 2018, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> >> All agreed, but what alternatives are being developed?
>
> > I seem to recall a proposal a while back to gain margin on some of
> > the limits by pruning the release notes section down to at least
> > this century and archiving putting the older ones elsewhere.
>
> Yeah; I did and still do think that's a good idea. But so far as
> the toolchain is concerned, that's just a band-aid.
>
> Anyway, we're on XML now, and it seems to be working fairly well. I
> don't feel a need to revisit that. It's probably true that the
> TeX-based toolchain was potentially capable of producing finer
> typesetting results than the XML chain ... but, honestly, who's
> printing the PG manual on dead trees anymore? I find the PDF output
> to be mostly a legacy thing in the first place.

Speaking of legacy things, do we want to see about deprecating LaTeX
output for tables in psql? I haven't seen such a thing in production,
but maybe I'm missing something important.

Best,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate