Roberto Mello writes:
> It's a documentation license with the same spirit as the GPL
> basically. I only licensed it under the GFDL because it was the only one I
> knew of. If that poses a problem for inclusion into the PG docs (which are
> BSD licensed? how does the BSD licenso apply to documentation?) please
Like this:
: Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
: documentation for any purpose, without fee, and without a written agreement
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this
: paragraph and the following two paragraphs appear in all copies.
> let's discuss it so we can reach an agreement.
> All I want is to help the PG docs to be better. Is there a
> "Documentation-TODO" somewhere? I'd be happy to tackle something else when
> I finish PL/pgSQL.
Not really. You get to pick. But I can tell you a few things that I
would personally like to see done.
> On that topic (PL/pgSQL) I wanted to know from Thomas if it's ok for
> mo to break the topics in the PL/pgSQL docs. I find that the
> "everything-under-description" approach is confusing to refer to. It's
> hard to see the topics, etc. Breaking up the topics under "description"
> would also allow we to add more specific and rich examples.
I say, whatever you say goes. ;-)
> That's one of the reasons I like the lpd.dsl stylesheet. It creates
> tables of contents with <sect2>'s listed. (look at
> http://www.brasileiro.net/roberto/howto for an example).
We got that too now. Since Sunday, I think.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/
