From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: 7.3 docs |
Date: | 2006-03-04 19:32:11 |
Message-ID: | 4409EB3B.4060306@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
>
> I'm about 50-50 split on this one ... but, if we are still actively
> supporting a version of PostgreSQL, we are acknowledging that ppl
> *are* still using it, and, therefore, ppl could still be annotating
> the interactie docs ...
>
Speaking of this... why doesn't every single page of the 7.3, 7.4 and
8.0 docs say:
8.1.3 is the latest stable version of PostgreSQL.
AND:
7.4.x (or 7.3.x etc) is the latest version of the 7.4 series. If you are
not running this version you need to upgrade.
> But ... the docs themselves are pretty static, so *why* are they being
> regenerated on a regular basis in the first place? Couldn't you just
> regenerate those files that have comments attached to them, instead of
> all of them each time? It would make the mirrors faster too, since
> they wouldn't have to pull down new copies of the complete docs each
> time, but only those pages that have actually had changes made to them
> ...
>
>
>
> ----
> Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services
> (http://www.hub.org)
> Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ:
> 7615664
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2006-03-06 09:57:08 | Re: 7.3 docs |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2006-03-04 19:15:42 | Re: 7.3 docs |