Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> >> In hindsight I could have loaded the ASCII release notes into a wiki and
> >> people could have modified, them, and later I could have converted them
> >> to SGML,
>
> That was, in fact, *exactly* what you said you'd do 3 months ago when we
> discussed this.
I now remember discussing it but I don't remember many of the details.
> > Yeah, I don't think that would have been better.
>
> Thing is, doing things like rearranging items for clarity is
> prohibitively painful in SGML. And while I know a professional
> copy-editor who would be willing to fix grammar, etc, she's not going
> anywhere near SGML.
>
> I think we're back at having two sets of feature information: one for
> the general public, one for the technically inclined.
>
> Or, to put it another way: I do the feature list for the general public.
> I'm not doing it in SGML. It's too freaking hard to edit. If someone
> else wants to take up doing that work, they can do it in any format they
> want.
I can accept diffs in any format and merge them into the SGML. That's
the way the proofreaders are working:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Documentation_Proofreading
I do not require them to submit SGML; just some format where I can
identify the lines that changed. I can do the same for the release
notes. I have to check the diffs anyway so manually merging in the
changes isn't a problem.
It is certainly easy to put the information on a wiki for a week and
allow it to be proofread before adding the SGML markup. However, there
will still be adjustments after that and I am still going to be merging
stuff into SGML, just not as much.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
