Thread: Ready to release?
I've made improvements to the hardcopy User's Guide (and A4 version)
to include mention of the postgres "-P" option and to fix up some
formatting. Will download them this morning within a couple of hours
(gotta do it from work since my home networking won't be here until I
upgrade my s/w after 7.0 is released).
afaik we will be ready to release at that time. Any other
show-stoppers?
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California
> I've made improvements to the hardcopy User's Guide (and A4 version) > to include mention of the postgres "-P" option and to fix up some > formatting. Will download them this morning within a couple of hours > (gotta do it from work since my home networking won't be here until I > upgrade my s/w after 7.0 is released). > > afaik we will be ready to release at that time. Any other > show-stoppers? > Do you want PDF? I can do it, or should we send out postscript? -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
> Do you want PDF? I can do it, or should we send out postscript?
Sure we should send out postscript. I *know* what the Postscript looks
like; I haven't worked with the PDF to know that it is 100% good.
Also, PDF requires a reader which afaik is not available on all of our
supported platforms; Postscript is supported natively by some
printers.
Shall we revisit this for 7.1, well before release time?
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> Shall we revisit this for 7.1, well before release time?
Yes. This is no time to be thinking about changing stuff.
PS docs are what we know we can make without problems.
I think PDF would be a good second alternative, though.
Perhaps after release, we could make up a second batch
of hardcopy docs in PDF form and make those available as
a separate download.
regards, tom lane
> > Do you want PDF? I can do it, or should we send out postscript? > > Sure we should send out postscript. I *know* what the Postscript looks > like; I haven't worked with the PDF to know that it is 100% good. > Also, PDF requires a reader which afaik is not available on all of our > supported platforms; Postscript is supported natively by some > printers. > > Shall we revisit this for 7.1, well before release time? No, if you are happy with Postscript, let's stay with it. I only recommended PDF because we can embed the fonts right in the file, but maybe that isn't important. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
On Mon, 8 May 2000, Thomas Lockhart wrote: > > Do you want PDF? I can do it, or should we send out postscript? > > Sure we should send out postscript. I *know* what the Postscript looks > like; I haven't worked with the PDF to know that it is 100% good. > Also, PDF requires a reader which afaik is not available on all of our > supported platforms; Postscript is supported natively by some > printers. > > Shall we revisit this for 7.1, well before release time? Why not create a PDF and just make it available on the web/ftp site? I find it handy from time to time to do text searches. Vince. -- ========================================================================== Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev@michvhf.com http://www.pop4.net128K ISDN from $22.00/mo - 56K Dialup from $16.00/moat Pop4 Networking Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com ==========================================================================
On Mon, 8 May 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Do you want PDF? I can do it, or should we send out postscript?
> >
> > Sure we should send out postscript. I *know* what the Postscript looks
> > like; I haven't worked with the PDF to know that it is 100% good.
> > Also, PDF requires a reader which afaik is not available on all of our
> > supported platforms; Postscript is supported natively by some
> > printers.
> >
> > Shall we revisit this for 7.1, well before release time?
>
> No, if you are happy with Postscript, let's stay with it. I only
> recommended PDF because we can embed the fonts right in the file, but
> maybe that isn't important.
Just a thought, but putting PDF versions online might be much much more
friendly to those downloading ... the only one that *truly* needs to be in
the distribution is the html stuff, the rest should be made available
through the WWW, for those that want ... not everyone has a postscript
printer, so downloading postscript files tend to sound like more work then
should be required ... *shrug*
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
> Just a thought, but putting PDF versions online might be much much more > friendly to those downloading ... the only one that *truly* needs to be in > the distribution is the html stuff, the rest should be made available > through the WWW, for those that want ... not everyone has a postscript > printer, so downloading postscript files tend to sound like more work then > should be required ... *shrug* Yes, IMHO, PDF seems to be the standard download format for documents. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> writes: > Also, PDF requires a reader which afaik is not available on all of our > supported platforms Xpdf should be supported almost everywhere: http://www.foolabs.com/xpdf/ -- Trond Eivind Glomsrød Red Hat, Inc.
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> Just a thought, but putting PDF versions online might be much much more
> friendly to those downloading ... the only one that *truly* needs to be in
> the distribution is the html stuff, the rest should be made available
> through the WWW, for those that want ... not everyone has a postscript
> printer, so downloading postscript files tend to sound like more work then
> should be required ... *shrug*
Perhaps not everyone would want the html version, either. Maybe we
ought to think about dividing the download into "sources" and then
several alternative forms of "docs":
postgres-7.1-src.tar.gzpostgres-7.1-docs-html.tar.gzpostgres-7.1-docs-ps.tar.gzpostgres-7.1-docs-pdf.tar.gz
That way everyone can pick the format(s) they want, and not waste time
downloading what they don't want.
regards, tom lane
On Mon, 8 May 2000, Tom Lane wrote: > The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > > Just a thought, but putting PDF versions online might be much much more > > friendly to those downloading ... the only one that *truly* needs to be in > > the distribution is the html stuff, the rest should be made available > > through the WWW, for those that want ... not everyone has a postscript > > printer, so downloading postscript files tend to sound like more work then > > should be required ... *shrug* > > Perhaps not everyone would want the html version, either. Maybe we > ought to think about dividing the download into "sources" and then > several alternative forms of "docs": > > postgres-7.1-src.tar.gz > postgres-7.1-docs-html.tar.gz > postgres-7.1-docs-ps.tar.gz > postgres-7.1-docs-pdf.tar.gz > > That way everyone can pick the format(s) they want, and not waste time > downloading what they don't want. Thath sounds good also ... :)
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > No, if you are happy with Postscript, let's stay with it. I only > recommended PDF because we can embed the fonts right in the file, but > maybe that isn't important. You can embed font right in the file in PS as well, if you think this is needed. I don't see any need for this currently, as the docs have no need for additional fonts. -------- Hannu
Tom Lane writes:
> Perhaps not everyone would want the html version, either.
But then you don't have *anything*. I feel there should be some formatted
documentation included by default. The HTML build is pretty solid, so it's
not like it's delaying anything. OTOH, {A4, Letter} x {PS, PDF} would mean
4 redundant sets of print style docs, so not necessarily distributing all
seems reasonable. (I want DVI anyway but our docs are too big for jadetex.
:{ )
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden