On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 12:54:40PM +0300, Liudmila Mantrova wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Reading this thread, I got an impression that everyone would benefit from
> converting back branches to XML, but the main concern is lack of resources to
> complete this task. Are there any other issues that affect this decision? Looks
> like Aleksander Lakhin's offer to prepare patches was missed somehow as the
> discussion sidetracked to other issues:
>
> I can prepare such patches (scripts to generate them). In fact we (Postgres
> Pro) perform such conversion (SGML->XML) on-fly when building docs starting
> from 9.6. So it's not problem to convert *.sgml and replace Makefile and
> *.xsl. But I would prefer to perform the conversion when we finish the move
> on 11devel (renaming sgml to xml, maybe optimizing xsl's...).
>
> Do you think it's worth considering after May releases? I could also help with
> manual testing of the prepared patches if required. Supporting documentation
> and translation in several branches will be much easier if the sources are
> consistent.
Well, I will say that backpatching doc changes is more complex having
SGML and XML in supported versions, particularly because of the
different tag endings between them. Therefore, having all the docs be
XML would be nice from my perspective.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
