From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org,Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>,Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Add documentation for the JIT feature. |
Date: | 2018-03-31 15:46:18 |
Message-ID: | EBC6E556-0E98-41C9-ACE1-5B9CB638AF4D@anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On March 31, 2018 8:43:37 AM PDT, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 3/29/18 14:43, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I'm *not* OK with expanding the scope of "make check"
>to include building the documentation. It's never had anything to do
>with docs before and I see no reason to start now. Personally, when
>I'm working on a patch, the doc updates if any are a completely
>separate
>matter. I don't want to waste cycles on testing docs when I'm trying
>to test code, any more than I would like the reverse (ie forcing a docs
>build to build code too).
They're a local check target in the docs directory. But it just checks postgres.xml, not additional targets. Don't think anybody proposed to add the doc check to the top-level check target.
Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-03-31 15:58:34 | Re: pgsql: Add documentation for the JIT feature. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-03-31 15:43:37 | Re: pgsql: Add documentation for the JIT feature. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-03-31 15:53:22 | Re: [PROPOSAL] Shared Ispell dictionaries |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-03-31 15:43:37 | Re: pgsql: Add documentation for the JIT feature. |