Re: RC3 ...
Joel Burton <jburton@scw.org>
From: Joel Burton <jburton@scw.org>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>, lamar.owen@wgcr.org, Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2001-04-07T18:30:36Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Thomas Lockhart writes: > > > > > The docs are ready for shipment. > > > Even better ... > > > Okay, let's let this sit as RC3 for the next week... > > > > I'll go ahead and start generating hardcopy, though I understand that it > > is no longer allowed into the shipping tarball :( > > I'm not speaking about "allowed", I'm merely talking about the state of > affairs since 7.0. If people think that the postscript format should be > in the main tarball, then why not, but IIRC this question was raised last > time around and the decision went the other way. Having had to d/l PG many times on many different machines, I'd be delighted if it came w/o .ps docs, and w/o the doc sources (the number of people who seem to be able to turn docbook into useful stuff seems to be << than people who can successful compile PG!). It sounds like the separate-tgz for docs and for Postscript makes perfect sense. Just make sure that it's *very* obvious where/how to get these, so that the mailing lists are deluged w/ 'where are the docs'? Just my .02, -- Joel Burton <jburton@scw.org> Director of Information Systems, Support Center of Washington