Thread: Re: [Fwd: Re: Bug#245310: pgadmin3-data: pgadmin3 ships duplicate of PostgreSQL]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e@gmx.net]
> Sent: 23 April 2004 10:57
> To: Dave Page; Raphaël Enrici; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] [Fwd: Re: Bug#245310:
> pgadmin3-data: pgadmin3 ships duplicate of PostgreSQL]
>
>
> It seems to me that they are index files of some kind that
> are generated by automatic means from the various HTML
> documentation files.

No, that's exactly what they are not (if you see what I mean!). Someone has started a project in the HW and added each
ofthe HTML files in the pg docs. They have then manually created index entries and a browsable treeview index. There is
nothingautomatic about it (unfortunately).  

> The fact that they can also be edited
> by hand does not mean that they can reasonably count as
> source code.

They are the source code to a Compiled HTML Help file. Call them project files if you don't like the term 'source', but
theyare used to build a binary file. It gets confusing because on *nix we don't actually use the .chm file - instead,
thewxWindows help system reads the index and html files directly. 

> (You can also edit binary object files or
> Postscript files by hand.)

Maybe, but you couldn't easily author one from scratch. The files in question can be easily written from scratch (have
alook at them, they're quite simple). The HW is no more required than the class wizard in VC++ used when writing an MFC
application- it just make life a lot simpler. 

BTW, as the local DocBook expert (iirc) if you have any ideas about how these files could be autogenerated from the
SGMLsource, I'd love to hear them. 

> Don't get me wrong, it's up to you how you develop your
> software.  I'm just pointing out these issues before the
> Debian license police finds them and rips out the package.

No, it's good to work out these issues no matter whose opinion proves the most accepted (I'll refrain from saying right
orwrong) - thanks for raising them. 

Regards, Dave.

Dave, Peter,

to do it short:
[1] I've added a ref to BSD licence (precising that it concerns the
PostgreSQL documentation delivered with pgAdmin III) in the Debian
package to be compliant with Debian policy.
[2] PostgreSQL documentation delivered with pgAdmin III should be kept
as is as it reflects the PostgreSQL version supported by pgAdmin III.
[3] *.hh[cpk] files can be kept as they are part of the source and are
not machine generated files.

Here is the "Please teach me question":
which files are involved in getting a better presentation of the online
documentation ?
I mean indexes or so. I was persuated these were the *.hh[cpk] but it
seem I was totally wrong...

Dave, thank you for your explanations.

Regards,
Raphaël

Dave Page wrote:
> BTW, as the local DocBook expert (iirc) if you have any ideas about
> how these files could be autogenerated from the SGML source, I'd love
> to hear them.

This is probably what you want:

http://www.dpawson.co.uk/docbook/styling/htmlhelp.html
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/doc/htmlhelp.html

It talks about converting XML, not SGML, but you can convert SGML to XML
automatically.  IIRC, there has occasionally been some interest to
provide HTML Help files for the documentation, but until now we didn't
have a Windows port, so there was never much interest on the producer
side.  Now that I know that pgAdmin needs this and with a Windows port
coming up, maybe the next PostgreSQL release can provide this.

Peter Eisentraut wrote:

>IIRC, there has occasionally been some interest to
>provide HTML Help files for the documentation, but until now we didn't
>have a Windows port, so there was never much interest on the producer
>side.  Now that I know that pgAdmin needs this and with a Windows port
>coming up, maybe the next PostgreSQL release can provide this.
>
>
Yes, it would probably the best if pgsql provided a separate html help
file, which could be addressed by pgadmin3 help in a seamless way.

Regards,
Andreas