Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>,
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndquadrant.com>,
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-12-14T22:29:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 12/14/2016 08:06 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 09:46:44AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >>>> My own take on it is that the release notes are already a massive >>>> amount of work, and putting duplicative material in a bunch of other >>>> places isn't going to make things better, it'll just increase the >>>> maintenance burden. >>> >>> This would mean adding literally pages of material to the release notes. >>> In the past, folks have been very negative on anything which would make >>> the release notes longer. Are you sure? >> >> As that's a per-version information, that seems adapted to me. There >> could be as well in the release notes a link to the portion of the >> docs holding this manual. Definitely this should be self-contained in >> the docs, and not mention the wiki. My 2c. > > Yes, that is the usual approach. > So where in the docs should these go, then? We don't (currently) have a place for this kind of doc. Appendices? -- -- Josh Berkus Red Hat OSAS (any opinions are my own)