Re: split func.sgml to separated individual sgml files
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
To: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com>,
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Florents Tselai
<florents.tselai@gmail.com>, Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>,
jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>,
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>,
Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-10-06T08:53:57Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 06.10.25 10:29, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 3 Oct 2025 at 18:47, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: >> >> On 2025-10-03 Fr 10:41 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> >> Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes: >> >> If you look at this more closely, creating postgres-full.xml and running >> the syntax check perform the same operations, except that the latter >> throws away the output. So it seems redundant to build a whole new code >> path for this. I think you can make the check target dependent on >> postgres-full.xml and be done, kind of like this (starting from >> pre-b2922562726): >> >> Would it be unreasonable to discard the "check" target altogether? >> It made sense back in the day when actually building the html docs >> took many minutes. But I haven't used it in years, so I wonder >> if anyone else has either. >> >> I have no objection. We'll need to work out what we're doing on the meson side, which is kinda where we came in ... > > I can work on this but I want to clarify it first. Which one do you prefer: > > 1- We won't have any command to do syntax checks (including tab and > nbsp), these checks will automatically run when we generate docs. > > 2- We will have a 'check' target but it will only do tab and nbsp > checks; xmllint will run only when generating the docs. I don't know, people have a lot of individual workflows, and they are not reading this thread. I still don't know what we are actually trying to fix here, I just noticed that what was committed is flawed. I would prefer that b2922562726 be reverted, and then someone start a new thread with a descriptive change proposal.
Commits
-
Revert "Improve docs syntax checking"
- 5b5e8a29c13a 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Improve docs syntax checking
- b29225627262 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Teach doc/src/sgml/Makefile about the new func/*.sgml files.
- 170a8a3f4605 19 (unreleased) cited
-
Split func.sgml into more manageable pieces
- 4e23c9ef65ac 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Doc: add check to detect non-breaking spaces in the docs.
- 5b7da5c261d1 18.0 cited