| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net, corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com, jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: documentation structure |
| Date: | 2024-07-19 16:22:14 |
| Message-ID: | 4124241.1721406134@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 8:06 PM Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
>>> I'm opposed to having a separate file for every function. I think
>>> breaking up func.sgml into one piece per sect1 is about right.
>> That will create at least 30 func-xx.sgml files.
>> I am afraid that's too many?
> The premise and the resultant number of files both seem reasonable to me.
I agree. The hundreds that would result from file-per-function, or
anything close to that, would be too many. But I can deal with
file-per-sect1. For context, I count currently 167 sgml/*.sgml files
plus 219 ref/*.sgml, so adding 30 more would be an 8% increase.
Do we want to use a "func-" prefix on the file names? I could
imagine dispensing with that as unnecessary; or another idea
could be to make a new subdirectory func/ for these.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2024-07-19 16:26:20 | Re: Built-in CTYPE provider |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2024-07-19 15:50:41 | Re: Built-in CTYPE provider |