Thread: On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating
I see that we have 8.1 static and interactive docs up already (good) but they are 8.1RC1 (not so good). Would someone please update them to 8.1 final? Also, there's no links for the 8.1 docs yet at http://www.postgresql.org/docs/ or http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/ regards, tom lane
> I see that we have 8.1 static and interactive docs up already > (good) but they are 8.1RC1 (not so good). Would someone > please update them to 8.1 final? Dave? Probalby easiest for you to do that, as you did what's up there now. > Also, there's no links for the 8.1 docs yet at > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/ or > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/ That's intentional, it's scheduled to go up along with the press release and related info once the release is done. //Magnus
'tis top of my list for tomorrow morning. /D -----Original Message----- From: "Tom Lane"<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> Sent: 06/11/05 21:35:04 To: "pgsql-www@postgresql.org"<pgsql-www@postgresql.org> Subject: [pgsql-www] On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating I see that we have 8.1 static and interactive docs up already (good) but they are 8.1RC1 (not so good). Would someone please update them to 8.1 final? Also, there's no links for the 8.1 docs yet at http://www.postgresql.org/docs/ or http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/ regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match -----Unmodified Original Message----- I see that we have 8.1 static and interactive docs up already (good) but they are 8.1RC1 (not so good). Would someone please update them to 8.1 final? Also, there's no links for the 8.1 docs yet at http://www.postgresql.org/docs/ or http://www.postgresql.org/docs/manuals/ regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
On Sun, 2005-06-11 at 22:37 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > That's intentional, it's scheduled to go up along with the press release > and related info once the release is done. What is the reasoning for this? IMHO for future releases it would be a better idea to make the beta documentation a part of the main website's list of documentation at about the same time the first beta is released. That would make the documentation easier to find and would also encourage more people to use the beta. -Neil
On Nov 7, 2005, at 6:46 , Neil Conway wrote: > On Sun, 2005-06-11 at 22:37 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> That's intentional, it's scheduled to go up along with the press >> release >> and related info once the release is done. > > What is the reasoning for this? IMHO for future releases it would be a > better idea to make the beta documentation a part of the main > website's > list of documentation at about the same time the first beta is > released. > That would make the documentation easier to find and would also > encourage more people to use the beta. I agree with your points. One reservation I have is that people might be more likely to run a beta in a production environment. Nowadays it seems increasingly common for projects to release betas for widespread circulation. I don't know if this is something that should be encouraged for PostgreSQL. I'd hate to see people get a bad impression of PostgreSQL because a beta screws up their data. Putting it on the top page might lend it more credibility and lead people to trust it in environments they shouldn't--even though PostgreSQL hackers are very clear that beta should not be used in production. I'd guess these things are better discussed on -advocacy. Michael Glaesemann grzm myrealbox com
> -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Michael > Glaesemann > Sent: 07 November 2005 02:04 > To: Neil Conway > Cc: Magnus Hagander; Tom Lane; Dave Page; PostgreSQL WWW Mailing List > Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] On-line docs for PG 8.1 need updating > > > On Nov 7, 2005, at 6:46 , Neil Conway wrote: > > > On Sun, 2005-06-11 at 22:37 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> That's intentional, it's scheduled to go up along with the press > >> release > >> and related info once the release is done. > > > > What is the reasoning for this? IMHO for future releases it > would be a > > better idea to make the beta documentation a part of the main > > website's > > list of documentation at about the same time the first beta is > > released. > > That would make the documentation easier to find and would also > > encourage more people to use the beta. > > I agree with your points. One reservation I have is that > people might > be more likely to run a beta in a production environment. > Nowadays it > seems increasingly common for projects to release betas for > widespread circulation. I don't know if this is something > that should > be encouraged for PostgreSQL. I'd hate to see people get a bad > impression of PostgreSQL because a beta screws up their data. > Putting > it on the top page might lend it more credibility and lead people to > trust it in environments they shouldn't--even though PostgreSQL > hackers are very clear that beta should not be used in production. > > I'd guess these things are better discussed on -advocacy. Probably not - It's me that does the job, and if you discuss it there it won't make any difference as I won't see it :-) Regards, Dave.
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 11:03 +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote: > I agree with your points. One reservation I have is that people might > be more likely to run a beta in a production environment. Nowadays it > seems increasingly common for projects to release betas for > widespread circulation. I don't know if this is something that should > be encouraged for PostgreSQL. I'd hate to see people get a bad > impression of PostgreSQL because a beta screws up their data. IMHO it is fairly clearly a good thing to get more publicity for Postgres betas. That is the whole point of the beta program in the first place: I don't see that putting more beta information on the main website is fundamentally different from sending email announcing betas to -announce, for example. Provided that the caveats are clear, I think there's a lot to be gained by publicizing betas more effectively. -Neil
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Neil Conway wrote: > On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 11:03 +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote: >> I agree with your points. One reservation I have is that people might >> be more likely to run a beta in a production environment. Nowadays it >> seems increasingly common for projects to release betas for >> widespread circulation. I don't know if this is something that should >> be encouraged for PostgreSQL. I'd hate to see people get a bad >> impression of PostgreSQL because a beta screws up their data. > > IMHO it is fairly clearly a good thing to get more publicity for > Postgres betas. That is the whole point of the beta program in the first > place: I don't see that putting more beta information on the main > website is fundamentally different from sending email announcing betas > to -announce, for example. Provided that the caveats are clear, I think > there's a lot to be gained by publicizing betas more effectively. As long as it is appropriate tagged as being beta (and clearly), I tend to agree ... the more ppl we can encourage to test/pound a beta, the better the end release is ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664