On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> AFAICT from a quick look at its documentation, asciidoc can produce
> either html or docbook output; so as soon as you want something other
> than html output (in particular, PDF), you're back to relying on the
> exact same creaky docbook toolchain we use now. Only with one extra
> dependency in front of it.
>
> Personally I never look at anything but the HTML rendering, but I doubt
> that dropping support for all other output formats would fly :-(
Just out of curiosity, really?
I mean, I can't see that building a PDF of the documentation really
has much value, and I don't know even what else we can build. Who in
2015 would use a PDF instead of HTML?
(If there is somebody, that is fine. But I am curious who it is and
why, because it seems to me like it would just be a nuisance.)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
