Re: cvs chapters in our docs
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2009-11-26T15:56:39Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 16:38, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> Robert Haas wrote: >>> I have to say I'm not really impressed by the idea of removing things >>> from our documentation and replacing them with pages on the wiki. The >>> documentation is better-written and easier to navigate. > >> I agree in general, but information about version control isn't really >> part of the product. For example, if we switch from CVS to Git, and >> decide to pull the plug on the CVS server (hypotethically; in reality >> I'm sure we'd leave the CVS server around for historical purposes), the >> information becomes obsolete. > > If our docs are supposed to cover only information that's not subject > to change, they'll become quite short. I agree with Robert that moving > the info from the SGML docs to the wiki isn't an improvement. I assume you are fine with the addition of some info about git, but what about the removal of those two chapters suggested? -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/