On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 04:19:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > So, should we rename the *.sgml files to *.xml, since they are actually
> > now XML files?
>
> At that point, back-patching documentation fixes would become effectively
> impossible except through manual intervention in the patching process.
> I don't want to go there. The recent changes have already imposed a
> significant PITA factor on generating minor-release notes, and this
> would push it past what I care to deal with.
>
> As I've remarked before, the issue would disappear if we were to
> back-patch the XML-ization of the documentation. So I'd be fine
> with this if we did it uniformly in the supported branches. Otherwise
> I think the costs outweigh the benefits.
+1 for back-patching.
Are there scripts for (at least the first cut of) this?
Best,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
